department of the navy€¦ · categorical exclusion (catex) and an environmental impact statement...

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

FY 1998/1999

BIENNIAL BUDGET ESTIMATES(BRAC 93)

BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT, IIICONGRESSIONAL SUBMIT

FEBRUARY 1997

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

I. Executive Summary and Overall Financial Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 and 4

II. Base Closure and Realignment Detail Packages Alphabetical by Activity Location:

Naval Air Station, Agana, Guam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Naval Air Station, Alameda, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Naval Aviation Depot, Alameda, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Naval Radio Transmitting Facility, Annapolis, Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Naval Air Station, Barbers Point, Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Naval Air Station, Cecil Field, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Naval Shipyard Charleston, South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Naval Station, Charleston, South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, Charleston, South Carolina . . . . . . . 71 Naval Air Station, Dallas, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Naval Air Facility, Detroit, Michigan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Naval Radio Transmitting Facility, Driver, Virginia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Naval Air Station, Glenview, Illinois. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Sea Automated Data Systems Activity, Indian Head, Maryland . . . . . . . 109 Naval Air Station, Memphis, Tennessee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Naval Air Facility, Midway Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Naval Air Station, Miramar, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Naval Station, Mobile, Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Naval Education and Training Center, Newport, Rhode Island .. . . . . . . . 137 DOD Family Housing Office, Niagara Falls, New York. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 Naval Aviation Depot, Norfolk, Virginia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Naval Hospital, Oakland, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Naval Hospital, Orlando, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Naval Training Center, Orlando, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Naval Aviation Depot, Pensacola, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, Pensacola, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California . . . . . . . . 187 Submarine Maintenance, Engineering, Planning, and Procurement, Portsmouth, New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, San Bruno, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Naval Training Center, San Diego, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Navy Public Works Center, San Francisco, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 Naval Station, Staten Island, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Naval Station, Treasure Island, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 Naval Shipyard Mare Island, Vallejo, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

III. Base Closure and Realignment Detail Packages By Function:

Naval Air Warfare Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Naval Command, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center, East Coast In-Service Engineering Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 Naval Surface Warfare Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Naval Undersea Warfare Centers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 Stand-Alone Reserve Centers and Readiness Commands. . . . . . . . . . 253 Planning, Engineering for Repair, and Alterations Centers. . . . . . . . . . 259

IV. Base Closure and Realignment Detail Package for the National Capital Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

V. Base Closure and Realignment Detail Packages for Various Locations and Planning and Design and Management:

Various Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 Planning and Design and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Implementation of the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC)Commission recommendations for BRAC 1993 is well underway within theDepartment of the Navy. The Navy budget to implement the closures andrealignments resulting from these decisions was formulated based onexperience gained from closures and realignments achieved thus far andcomprehensive analysis of remaining requirements.

Costs are presented in the following categories: militaryconstruction, family housing construction, family housing operations,environmental studies, environmental compliance, environmentalrestoration, operations and maintenance, military personnel PCS, other,and land sales revenue.

Savings are presented in the following categories: militaryconstruction, family housing construction, family housing operations,operations and maintenance, military personnel, and other. In addition,civilian and militaryend-strength savings are shown.

The Navy budget is organized alphabetically by closure activity,which closely follows the organization of the commission reports. Thebudget reflects costs through FY 2001, with special emphasis placed onthe one-time implementation costs for FY 1998/99.

(Note: Because of software conversions of the different programsused to create this book, the page numbers in this electronic versionwill not match the page numbers in the printed version. However, allmaterial which appears in the printed version is contained in thiselectronic version.)

ONE-TIME TOTAL

IMPLEMENTATION COSTS: FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY94-99

Military Construction 267301 541770 784088 284797 99395 27898 2005249Family Housing

Construction 0 0 10300 0 0 0 10300 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 151534 ][ 189888 ][ 136612 ][ 254566 ][ 209145 ][ 162818 ] 1104563 ] Studies 2180 4047 1921 3848 391 214 12601 Compliance 57825 121740 79600 99514 68017 52410 479106 Restoration 91529 64101 55091 151204 140737 110194 612856Operations & Maintenance 327817 655697 620311 267786 169724 82299 2123634Military Personnel - PCS 11984 20996 10641 23085 6697 3448 76851Other 25828 28167 5599 4249 0 -3 63840Other Appropriations (O&M,N) * [ 47000 ]

TOTAL COSTS 784464 1436518 1567551 834483 484961 276460 5384437

Land Sales Revenue 0 0 0 -173737 0 0 -173737

TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST 784464 1436518 1567551 660746 484961 276460 5210700

SAVINGS:

Military Construction -38460 -29580 -75044 -39052 -13948 -20602 -216686Family Housing

Construction -7360 0 -11600 0 0 -37100 -56060 Operations -757 -7633 -15464 -29814 -49609 -48986 -152263Operations & Maintenance -46872 -94516 -360911 -539596 -677959 -731553 -2451407Military Personnel -6485 -55706 -96796 -190882 -281139 -315852 -946860Other -2941 -15114 -120198 -186012 -201716 -205741 -731722Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 1092 ][ -9203 ][ -18983 ][ -23123 ][ -22250 ][ -23254 -95721 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -1936 ][ -4873 ][ -7757 ][ -8241 ][ -8261 -31068 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -102875 -202549 -680013 -985356 -1224371 -1359834 -4554998

NET IMPLEMENTATIONCOSTS:

Military Construction 228841 512190 709044 245745 85447 7296 1788563

Family Housing

Construction -7360 0 -1300 0 0 -37100 -45760

Operations -757 -7633 -15464 -29814 -49609 -48986 -152263

Environmental [ 151534 ][ 189888 ][ 136612 ][ 254566 ][ 209145 ][ 162818 ] 1104563 ] Studies 2180 4047 1921 3848 391 214 12601

Compliance 57825 121740 79600 99514 68017 52410 479106

Restoration 91529 64101 55091 151204 140737 110194 612856

Operations & Maintenance 280945 561181 259400 -271810 -508235 -649254 -327773

Military Personnel 5499 -34710 -86155 -167797 -274442 -312404 -870009

Other 22887 13053 -114599 -181763 -201716 -205744 -667882


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 1092 ][ -9203 ][ -18983 ][ -23123 ][ -22250 ][ -23254 -95721 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -1936 ][ -4873 ][ -7757 ][ -8241 ][ -8261 -31068 ]

NET IMPLEMENTATIONCOSTS

681589 1233969 887538 -324610 -739410 -1083374 655702

* O&M,N funds for NAVAIRHQrelocation

Closure/Realignment Location:NAS AGANA

ONE-TIME TOTAL


Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 6610 ][ 9800 ][ 11105 ][ 15716 ][ 11144 ][ 13699 ][ 68074 ] Studies 0 0 825 10 0 59 894 Compliance 558 300 387 6414 0 0 7659 Restoration 6052 9500 9893 9292 11144 13640 59521Operations & Maintenance 3089 4425 0 882 649 373 9418Military Personnel - PCS 0 450 0 0 0 0 450Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL COSTS 9699 14675 11105 16598 11793 14072 77942

Land Sales Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


SAVINGS:

Military Construction -7310 0 0 -1207 0 0 -8517Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -5065 -5206 -5507 -5637 -7700 -7700 -36815Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 -11698 -24004 -35702Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -426 ][ -430 ][ -856 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -12375 -5206 -5507 -6844 -19398 -31704 -81034


Military Construction -7310 0 0 -1207 0 0 -8517

Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Environmental [ 6610 ][ 9800 ][ 11105 ][ 15716 ][ 11144 ][ 13699 ][ 68074 ] Studies 0 0 825 10 0 59 894

Compliance 558 300 387 6414 0 0 7659

Restoration 6052 9500 9893 9292 11144 13640 59521

Operations & Maintenance -1976 -781 -5507 -4755 -7051 -7327 -27397

Military Personnel 0 450 0 0 -11698 -24004 -35252

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -426 ][ -430 ][ -856 ]


-2676 9469 5598 9754 -7605 -17632 -3092

CLOSURE/REALIGNMENT ACTION:

The 1993 commission recommended the closure of Naval Air Station (NAS)Agana, relocating Navy aviation units and support tenants to AndersenAir Force Base, Guam. The Navy was to retain and continue to utilizefamily housing units and selected personnel support facilities.

NAS was operationally closed on 31 March 1995. The community has optedfor screening under the new Homeless Assistance Act. The anticipateddisposal date for this property is September 2001.

The DOD BRAC 1995 recommendation impacts this closure action. The Navyaviation units were to be moved to other DoD sites and the remainingfamily housing units are to be disposed of under BRAC IV Program.

ONE-TIME IMPLEMENTATION COSTS:

Military Construction:

No requirement.

Family Housing Construction:

No requirement.

Family Housing Operations:

No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. ACategorical Exclusion (CATEX) and an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) contract was awarded in FY 1994 to document environmentalimpacts resulting from the Navy's disposal of facilities and land atNAS Agana with subsequent reuse. The EIS has required extensivepublic participation and coordination. Completion is expected in midFY 1997.

An Environmental Assessment is required to analyze the impacts of theHarmon Sink Easement. Funding for this is required in FY 1999.

Prior to the final disposal and reuse actions, parcels have beenlicensed or leased to the Guam Airport Authority (GAA) and theGovernment of Guam. A CATEX will be developed for the Phase I JointUse Agreement which includes the airfield, taxiway, parking aprons,control tower, airfield lighting and other selected parcels requiredby GAA to keep the airport operational after the closure of NAS. Asecond CATEX will be developed for the Phase I-A License & Interim

Lease Agreement with GAA for the hangars and aviation supply andsupport facilities. GAA plans to sublease these facilities tointerested commercial airlines and generate revenue to help defraycost of operations and caretaker responsibility. A third CATEX willalso be developed for Phase II License & Interim Lease Agreement withthe Government of Guam for the remaining parcels, such as the morale,welfare and recreational support facilities, bachelor officerquarters, barracks and galley.

Compliance:

Asbestos and lead based paint surveys are complete and under review.Friable, accessible and damaged asbestos abatement is required. ThePolychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) transformers have been managed inplace, retrofilled, retrofitted or removed. A Radon survey iscomplete, with no further action required. The closure of TheUnderground Storage Tanks (USTs) and Above Ground Storage Tanks arein progress. Sampling of the sediment from drywells has beencompleted. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC CleanupPlan (BCP) have been completed.

Installation Restoration:

There are twentynine Installation Restoration sites at the formerNaval Air Station, Agana. Twenty sites are currently in the RemedialInvestigation (RI) phase. A non-time critical removal action for twoof these sites are in the planning stages. RI for the remainingsites are planned. A Feasibility Study (FS) and a RemedialDesign/Remedial Action study for sixteen of the twentynine sites areplanned.

Operations and Maintenance:

Costs included program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations costs, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs included employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, permanent change of station asnecessary. Real Estate costs include the preparation and execution oflicenses and leases for reuse and ultimate disposal. A Caretaker SiteOffice is responsible for public relations and managing facilitiescommensurate with identified reuse requirements. This includesobtaining and maintaining required permits, providing for security andfire protection, personal property and property records management,utilities management, limited grounds and facilities maintenance,coordinating site access for environmental issues, and working withlocal officials to facilitate timely reuse of the site.

Military Personnel -- PCS:

PCS costs have been derived by using the average costs factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the base.

Other:

No requirement.

Land Sales Revenues:

The Navy completed the screening through DOD and other Federal Agenciesand has received interest from the Federal Aviation Administration, theNational Weather Service, Defense Commissary Agency, Guam NationalGuard, Guam Army Reserve, and the U.S. Postal Service. There are noexpected revenues from land sales, since the expected disposal willresult in conveyance to the Government of Guam for public benefit use.The Guam Reuse Committee (Komitea Para Tiyan) has based planning forreuse on expansion of the Guam International Airport, schools, housingand other public benefit uses.

SAVINGS:

None.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAS ALAMEDA, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 27081 33292 32072 61507 28087 15413 197452



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -4700 0 -4635 0 0 0 -9335Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 82 489 2546 3745 5998 6148 19008Operations & Maintenance -4076 4051 0 -15000 -27634 -28162 -70821Military Personnel 0 0 -467 -14952 -30053 -30754 -76226Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -358 ][ -358 ][ -358 ][ -1086 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -7 ][ -535 ][ -537 ][ -535 ][ -1614 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -8694 4540 -2556 -26207 -51689 -52768 -137374


Military Construction -4700 1950 17005 0 0 0 14255

Family Housing


Operations 82 489 2546 3745 5998 6148 19008


Compliance 7789 2500 753 8832 5157 992 26023

Restoration 13215 11000 2000 26427 10756 7612 71010

Operations & Maintenance 151 13326 7622 6533 -15515 -21408 -9291

Military Personnel 1850 8347 -410 -10533 -30053 -30754 -61553

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -358 ][ -358 ][ -358 ][ -1086 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -7 ][ -535 ][ -537 ][ -535 ][ -1614 ]


18387 37832 29516 35300 -23602 -37355 60078


Close the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda, which supports aviationsquadrons, aircraft carriers (CVN), and surface operations and trainingfor the U.S. Pacific Fleet. NAS also provides support for Naval andMarine Corps Reserve activities and a Naval Aviation Depot. Plannedconsolidation of HM-15 (active) and HM-19 (reserve) has been completed.Final relocation of the consolidated squadron has been redirected to NASCorpus Christi under BRAC IV recommendations. Relocation of USNRactivities to NASA/Ames Federal Airfield has been completed with theexception of MAG-46 squadron. Scheduled operational closure dateremains 30 April 1997 with a scheduled mission cease date of January1997, following the departure of the USS Carl Vinson to Bremerton,Washington. The following BRAC III actions support closure of NASAlameda:

o One CVN to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNSY) and one CVN to NAS North Island.o Disestablishment of Naval Aviation Depot (separate BRAC III action).o Relocation of surface ships to Naval Station San Diego and PSNSY.



FY1995-1996 Amount ($000) -------P-305T PUGET SOUND NSY PLAYING FIELDS 1,950P-298T INDIAN IS HADLOCK NU HIGH EXPLOSIVE MAGAZINES 5,100P-300T PUGET SOUND NSY PARKING GARAGE 14,400P-316T FALLON NAS BATTALION UNIT EQUIPMENT SHOP 2,140

Total 23,590


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. An

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was started in FY 1995 todocument impacts resulting from disposal and reuse of NAS Alameda(and NADEP Alameda). Environmental impacts specific to NAS Alamedawill be addressed by increased staffing effort and/or with additionalenvironmental studies. Prior to actual closure of the NAS, the Navywill allow interim use of facilities that no longer are activelysupporting the current mission. NEPA documentation to address theimpacts of these interim leases will include interim leaseEnvironmental Assessments (EA), parcel transfer EAs, and interimlicense Categorical Exclusions (CE).

Substantial management and coordination will be required tosuccessfully accomplish all environmental study needs. The SanFrancisco Bay Area is a region with an acute sensitivity toenvironmental issues, and there exists intense competition foravailable areas within this heavily urbanized setting. Thissituation requires intensive staff coordination with local reusecommittees and their many subcommittees, as well as with regulatoryagencies and environmental groups. While the contracted NEPAdocuments were awarded in FY 1994/1995, the actual environmentalplanning process will continue over several years based on theanticipated local reuse planning schedules, such that environmentalplanning staff time will be extensive over several years, well beyondthe theoretical 12-month period needed to complete the EIS. Inpartnership with the Local Reuse Authority, the EFA is formatting itsEIS and studies therein to also be compatible with requirements ofthe California equivalent of NEPA, the California EnvironmentalQuality Act. Funding is also required to evaluate least tern nestingsites success and for recordation of historic properties.

An EA was completed in FY 1995 to analyze the impacts of therelocation of assets to NAVSHIPYD Puget Sound, WA. An EnvironmentalImpact Statement (EIS) was completed in September 1994 to analyze theimpacts from construction of family housing at SUBASE Bangor, WA.Four CEs were completed for the relocation to NAS Oak Harbor, WA,NUWCD Indian Island, WA, NAS Corpus Christi, TX, and NS San Diego,CA.

Compliance:

One-time compliance actions (i.e. hazardous waste disposal, closureof permitted and unpermitted hazardous waste facilities, andabatement of potential health hazards) are required. The Asbestossurvey is complete, with abatement of the friable, accessible anddamaged asbestos underway. The Lead-Based Paint survey is ongoing.The Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) survey identified areas near PCBtranformers of past spill, which are being addressed during theparcel specific lease/transfer actions. A Radon survey is complete,with no further action required. Removal of Underground StorageTanks (USTs) is underway. The removal/closure in place of abandonedfuel lines is ongoing. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) andBRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) for the Naval Air Station/Naval AviationDepot have been completed. Costs include parcel-specific EBSs fortransfer or lease and Emissions Reduction Credit (ERC) analysis andpermitting.


Twenty-three (23) IR sites, grouped into four (4) Operable Units(OU), have been identified at the Naval Air Station/Naval AviationDepot complex. The IR program is managed by the Naval Air Station.The IR Program is in the final phase of Remedial Investigation (RI)with concurrent Feasibility Study for all OUs. Remedial actions areplanned or underway.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, tenant moving costs, employeetransition assistance, severance entitlements, reduction in force costs,travel, and permanent change of station as necessary to support theplanned closure of the activity. Also included are caretaker, realestate, and other related labor, support, and contractual requirementsnecessary to complete disposal of the property.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through other federal agencies, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfers to other federalagencies, homeless providers, discounted conveyance under a variety ofstatutory programs, including economic development purposes, or throughnegotiated or public sale. Proceeds from land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market or discountedvalue.

SAVINGS:


MCON projects which were in the FYDP have been removed.


The savings line reflects an increase in the FHN account for new unitscoming on line at Naval Station Bangor as a result of the relocationfrom NAS Alameda.


Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:

Savings are the result of a reduction in military billets.

Closure/Realignment Location:NADEP ALAMEDA, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL


Military Construction 0 0 1700 0 0 0 1700Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 883 ][ 9165 ][ 9194 ][ 13602 ][ 0 ][ 0 32844 ] Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Compliance 883 9165 9194 13602 0 0 32844 Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 14021 55614 64426 11373 859 0 146293Military Personnel - PCS 0 0 115 0 0 0 115Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL COSTS 14904 64779 75435 24975 859 0 180952



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 -2230 0 0 -2230Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 -47355 -48491 -49655 -145501Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 -24394 -24981 -25580 -74955Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -1652 ][ -1665 ][ -1709 ][ -1709 -6735 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 -140 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 0 -73979 -73472 -75235 -222686


Military Construction 0 0 1700 -2230 0 0 -530

Family Housing



Environmental [ 883 ][ 9165 ][ 9194 ][ 13602 ][ 0 ][ 0 32844 ] Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance 883 9165 9194 13602 0 0 32844

Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations & Maintenance 14021 55614 64426 -35982 -47632 -49655 792

Military Personnel 0 0 115 0 0 0 115

Other 0 0 0 -24394 -24981 -25580 -74955


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -1652 ][ -1665 ][ -1709 ][ -1709 -6735 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 ][ -28 -140 ]


14904 64779 75435 -49004 -72613 -75235 -41734


Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) Alameda closed in September 1996. Itsworkload has relocated to other depot maintenance activities at CherryPoint, NC, Jacksonville, FL, and San Diego (North Island), CA, as wellas to inter-service and private/commercial aviation depot maintenancecommunities.



FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-720T NORTH ISLAND NADEP ADMIN BUILDING 1,700

Subtotal 1,700

Total 1,700


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions.Relocation of assets from NADEP Alameda, NADEP Pensacola, and NADEPNorfolk to NADEP North Island has been Categorically Excluded fromfurther NEPA documentation.

Compliance:

Depot operations were reduced gradually over the shutdown period,eliminating production processes which use hazardous materials,produce hazardous waste, cause contamination of the facilities, andrequire regulatory oversight and permitting. These requirementsreflected costs for those items which would have been in complianceat the time of closure but would have fallen out of compliance priorto a new occupant moving in.


There is no funding requirement for NADEP Alameda. The InstallationRestoration (IR) sites at this activity are managed by the IR programat NAS Alameda as the host installation and included in the NASAlameda submission.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Costs also include repairs for shop/hangar space to accept transitionedaircraft and minor construction costs for seven projects.



Other:

No requirement.


None. The NADEP is a tenant of NAS Alameda and owns no property.

SAVINGS:


Savings result from the removal of projects which were in the FYDP.


Savings reflected represent the aggregate savings of closing NADEPAlameda and transitioning workload. Includes civilian personnel salarysavings resulting from closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:

None.

Other:

Savings reflect procurements that will not be funded under the DBOFprogram because of base closure decisions and customer savings

associated with the closure of depot facilities which had excesscapacity.

Closure/Realignment Location:NRTF ANNAPOLIS, MD

ONE-TIME TOTAL


Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 0 ] Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 215 0 0 0 215Military Personnel - PCS 40 0 0 0 0 0 40Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL COSTS 40 0 215 0 0 0 255



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -359 -370 -1049 -758 -775 -793 -4104Military Personnel -61 -123 -124 -126 -128 -131 -693Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 -90 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 -20 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -420 -493 -1173 -884 -903 -924 -4797



Family Housing



Environmental [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 0 ] Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Military Personnel -21 -123 -124 -126 -128 -131 -653

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 ][ -18 -90 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 -20 ]


-380 -493 -958 -884 -903 -924 -4542


Disestablish the Naval Radio Transmitting Facility (NRTF) Annapolis.NRTF Annapolis is to be retained by the Navy and ownership will transferto NAVSTA Annapolis. NRTF ceased operations on 18 January 1996.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCS

costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from the closure ofthe activity.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NAS BARBERS POINT, HI

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 8820 11814 43314 83102 22283 44995 214328



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -1350 -9800 -7189 0 0 -1445 -19784Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -1905 1000 -1089 -7179 -7703 -15899 -32775Military Personnel 0 -589 -303 -9940 -20142 -20609 -51583Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -109 ][ -109 ][ -109 ][ -327 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -9 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -2369 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3255 -9389 -8581 -17119 -27845 -37953 -104142


Military Construction 2940 -9800 31299 77080 7928 26453 135900

Family Housing




Compliance 1685 1500 1791 131 879 6169 12155

Restoration 2257 4200 34 3000 3050 5262 17803

Operations & Maintenance -1317 5663 1307 -4849 996 -10791 -8991


Other 0 751 0 561 0 0 1312


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -109 ][ -109 ][ -109 ][ -327 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -9 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -590 ][ -2369 ]


5565 2425 34733 65983 -5562 7042 110186


The 1993 commission recommended the closure of Naval Air Station (NAS)Barbers Point, which supports five (VP) squadrons, one Light AirborneMulti-Purpose System (LAMPS) helicopter squadron, Executive TransportDepartment and the U.S. Coast Guard air operations for the centralPacific and Hawaii, and other miscellaneous activities. Aviationsquadrons are to be relocated to NAS Whidbey and MCB Hawaii. The CoastGuard retention at NAS Barbers Point is a serious possibility. However,the possible relocation to Higham AFB or MCB Hawaii is still underconsideration. NAS Barbers Point family housing will be retained toaddress the existing housing shortfalls in the Pearl Harbor region. TheArmy "B" Company/214 Aviation Regiment, a tenant of the air station, hasmoved to Wheeler Army Base. A BRACON project may be submitted duringthe PR 99.

The Reuse Committee has been reappointed as the Redevelopment Commissionunder the Hawaii Revised Statutes. The Reuse plan is nearingcompletion. The community has opted for homeless screening under thenew Homeless Assistance Act.

The projected operational closure of NAS Barbers Point is July 1999. Theanticipated disposal date of this property is 2002. The DOD BRAC 1995recommendation impacts this closure action.



FY1994 -1996 Amount ($000) ------P-604T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS TACTICAL SUPPORT CENTER 4,290P-267T KANEOHE BAY MCAS AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON (PH I) 23,738P-269T KANEOHE BAY MCAS AIRCRAFT RINSE FAC MODS 2,100P-603T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS ACFT PARKING APRON ALTERATIONS 2,350P-605T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS FLIGHT SIMULATOR BUILDING ADD'N 3,650P-608T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS HANGAR ALTERATIONS 2,450P-612T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS ENGINE MAINTENANCE SHOP ADDN 4,200 ----- Subtotal 42,778

FY1997 Amount ($000) ------P-268T KANEOHE BAY MCAS ACFT PARKING APRON (PH II) 9,300P-270T KANEOHE BAY MCAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR ALTERATIONS 36,150P-271T KANEOHE BAY MCAS RENOVATE ADMIN 2,500P-272T KANEOHE BAY MCAS AIMD ALTERATIONS/ADDITIONS 1,300P-276T KANEOHE BAY MCAS TRAINING FACILITY 8,600P-287T KANEOHE BAY MCAS HELICOPTER LANDING PAD 550P-288T KANEOHE BAY MCAS HAZMAT/HAZ WASTE STORAGE 4,600P-299T KANEOHE BAY MCAS TACTICAL SUPPORT FACILITY 10,500

P-600T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS GSE SHOP 2,980P-615T WHIDBEY ISLAND NAS SONOBUOY STORAGE 600 ----- Subtotal 77,080

FY1998 Amount ($000) ------P-297T KANEOHE BAY MCAS AQM-37 FACILITIES 612P-274T KANEOHE BAY MCAS AVIATION SUPPLY FACS 1,491P-504T KANEOHE BAY MCAS UTILITIES UPGRADE 2,168P-508T KANEOHE BAY MCAS ORDNANCE FACILITIES 1,160P-524T PEARL HARBOR NS FLEET IMAGING CENTER 1,005P-539T PEARL HARBOR PWC UTILITY SYSTEM MODS 1,492

Subtotal 7,928

FY1999 Amount ($000) ------P-286T KANEOHE BAY MCAS BACHELOR QUARTERS 27,898

Subtotal 27,898

Total 155,684


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions;therefore, additional funding must be received in FY 1998 toaccommodate realignment schedules.

Prior to final disposal of NAS property, the Navy will pursue interimuse of selected parcels within the property under lease or licenseagreements. These interim uses will continue until completion ofenvironmental cleanup and final disposal. An EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) will be required to document the potential impacts ofsuch interim use. Reuse proposals for excess property by Departmentof Defense (DOD) and other Federal agencies will be confirmed withinthe next few months and a Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) will berequired to facilitate Federal reuse. DOD and Federal agency reusein some cases may precede operational closure through licenseagreements which necessitated funding of a CATEX in FY 1995. Funding

was provided in FY 1995 for an interim use EA to potentially permitinterim leasing prior to operational closure.

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was funded in FY 1994 todocument impacts resulting from the final disposal of Navy facilitiesand land at NAS Barbers Point. Impacts to be addressed include airand water quality (e.g., reuse as an industrial park may result inincreased air and water emissions), environmental cleanup levels,reuse of buildings that are potentially eligible for listing on theNational Register of Historic Places, and changes in land use. Thiseffort will involve extensive public participation and coordinationand is planned for completion upon approval of the State of HawaiiFinal Reuse Plan.

Funding for supporting studies to include identification of potentialuses and mitigation of impacts to natural, cultural and historicalresources are also required to complete the EIS. In addition, therewill be significant archaeological/cultural survey work to becompleted prior to disposal in order to satisfy the requirements ofthe National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and local concerns ofthe State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of HawaiianAffairs.

Potential adverse impacts to natural resources due to closure of NASBarbers Point was addressed by an Endangered Species and WetlandsSurvey conducted in FY 1995, and the follow-on mitigation work as thereuses and potentially affected areas were confirmed was done in FY1996. These studies established Navy responsibilities for mitigationof impacts to natural resources. Funding enabled the Navy tocomplete the Section 7 Consultation required by the EndangeredSpecies Act and therefore proceed with interim leasing or disposalactions.

The current budget submission is based on the mix currently specifiedby CINCPACFLT for P-3 and helicopter aircraft relocating from NASBarbers Point to Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH). This specified mixhas undergone several iterations and changes due to changingoperational and budgetary constraints. Due to significant changes inMarine base loading and Navy aircraft mix resulting from other BRACrelated actions, additional funding will be required to update the EAfor relocation from NAS Barbers Point, and the aircraft noise study.

The Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study was programmedfor funding in FY 1995. This study may require additional fundingfor an update if the aircraft mix is revised in FY 1997.

Compliance:

An asbestos survey is ongoing, with abatement of the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos required. The Lead Based Paintsurvey is ongoing, with some abatement planned at facilities withresidential reuse. A Radon survey is complete, with no furtheraction required. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) will be removedprior to base closure. Underground Storage Tank (UST) andAboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) will be closed in place or removedafter facilities closure. Some soil sampling, monitoring andremediation will be required at the UST locations. Sediments indrywells which are or have been used for the disposal of industrialwastewater, building drainage, and surface runoff have been sampled.

Should contamination exist, removal of contaminated sediments isrequired. Removal of uncontaminated sediments prior to permittransfer is planned.


There are 17 Installation Restoration (IR) sites identified at theNaval Air Station. Two of the sites have been recommended for nofurther action. The EBS identified 50 areas of concern, includingthree sites previously identified. Twelve of these areas have beenidentified as IR sites. The remainder have been incorporated intothree operable units, are in the retention area, or have been cleanedup via "housekeeping" actions. Fifteen sites are in the RemedialInvestigation (RI) phase. Interim Removal Actions are planned atthirteen confirmed sites and operable units. Long-term monitoring isplanned for the Regional Groundwater System operable unit.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and relocation costs, and tenant movingcosts. Also included are the removal and reinstallation of computersystems, P-3 operational flight weapons trainers, LAN systems, and thetransfer of aviation supply inventory. Civilian personnel one-timecosts include employee transition assistance, severance entitlements,and permanent change of station as necessary. Also included arecaretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strenth assigned to the base.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:

None.

1. Component

NAVY FY 1998 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM2. Date02/07/97

3. Installation and Location/UIC: N0534A

PACIFIC MISSILE RANGE FACILITY,BARKING SANDS, HAWAII

4. Project Title

ORDNANCE FACILITIES

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

212.10

7. Project Number

P-297T

8. Project Cost ($000)

612

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)ORDNANCE FACILITIESSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING, AND SITE IMPROVEMENT

SUBTOTALCONTINGENCY (5.0%)

TOTAL CONTRACT COSTSUPERVISION, INSPECTION, & OVERHEAD (6.5%)

TOTAL REQUESTEQUIPMENT FROM OTHER APPROPRIATIONS

m2-LS

--

--

--

273--

--

--

--

---

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

390 150 (150)------- 540 30------- 570 42------- 612 (0)

10. Description of Proposed Construction

Reinforced concrete building; work space, restrooms and storage area,lighting protection, utilities, paving and site improvements.

11. Requirement: 273 m2. Adequate: 0 m2. Substandard: (0) m2.

PROJECT:Constructs a building to support AQM-37 operations.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate ordnance facilities to support AQM-37 operations and functionsbeing relocated to this station from the Naval Air Station (NAS), BarbersPoint, Hawaii. Because of actions authorized by Public Law 101-510,Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NAS Barbers Point willclose and operational, maintenance, aviation and support units will berelocated to this station.

CURRENT SITUATION:This station does not have adequate ordnance facilities to accommodate allof the ordnance functions of aviation units being relocated.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, adequate ordnance services and storage will not beavailable for the relocating units. This station will not be able tosupport the closure of Barbers Point because of a lack of adequate ordnancefacilities.

DD Form1 Dec 76 1391

(Continued On DD 1391C…)

DD Form1 Dec 76 1391C

1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N0534APACIFIC MISSILE RANGE FACILITY, BARKING SANDS, HAWAII

4. Project Title

ORDNANCE FACILITIES

7. Project Number

P-297T

(…continued)

12. Supplemental Data:

A. Estimated Design Data: (Parametric estimates have been used todevelop project costs. Project design conforms to Part II of MilitaryHandbook 1190, Facility Planning and Design guide)

(1) Status (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04/96

(B) Date Design 35% Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09/96 (C) Date Design Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/96 (D) Percent Complete As Of September 1996. . . . . . . 35% (E) Percent Complete As Of January 1997. . . . . . . . 100%

(2) Basis: (A) Standard or Definitive Design: (B) Where Design Was Most Recently Used:

(3) Total Cost (C) = (A) + (B) Or (D) + (E): (A) Production of Plans and Specifications . . . . . . (40) (B) All Other Design Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20) (C) Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 (D) Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (50) (E) In-House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)

(4) Construction Start. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/97

B. Equipment associated with this project which will be provided fromother appropriations: NONE.

Installation POC: Lt James Fitzgerald, Phone: (808) 335-4213


1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: M00318

MARINE CORPS AIR STATION,KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII

4. Project Title

AVIATION SUPPLY FACILITIES

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

211.96

7. Project Number

P-274T


1,491

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)AVIATION SUPPLY FACILITIESSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING, AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




m2-LS

--

--

--

1,858--

--

--

--

550.00--

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,020 310 (310)------- 1,330 70------- 1,400 91------- 1,491 (0)


One-story building, reinforced concrete building, slab, and foundation,masonry exterior wall and insulated built up roof, steel framing, paving,fencing, utilities; relocate displaced parking.

11. Requirement: 1,858 m2. Adequate: 0 m2. Substandard: (0) m2.

PROJECT:Provides aviation supply facilities.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-confiqured aviation supply facility to support therelocation of Navy aviation operations. Because of actions required byPublic Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,the Naval Air Station (NAS), Barbers Point, Hawaii, will close, andoperational, maintenance, and support units will be relocated to thisstation.

CURRENT SITUATION:There are no existing facilities which can meet the requirements.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not be able to maintain and operatefacilities and provide services and materials to support operation of theNavy aviation units in the Pacific. This station will not be able tosupport the closure of Barbers Point.



(1) Status: (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09/95




1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC:M00318

MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII

4. Project Title

AVIATION SUPPLY FACILITIES

7. Project Number

P-274T

(…continued)






Installation POC: LCDR J. Landis, Phone: (808) 257-2171



1. Component




4. Project Title

UTILITIES UPGRADE

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

842.10

7. Project Number

P-504T


2,168

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)UTILITIES UPGRADE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM UPGRADE ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM UPGRADE WASTEWATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM UPGRADE




LSLSLSLS

--

--

--

----

--

--

--

----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,940 (1,000) (130) (810)------- 1,940 100------- 2,040 128------- 2,168 (0)


Upgrade the water, electrical, and wastewater distribution systems toinclude a new cement line ductile iron pipe with cathodic protection; tankmonitors and controls; modify existing valve pits; install additionalmedium voltage underground power cables in existing primary electricaldistribution circuits 2A and 2B.

11. Requirement: As Required. Adequate: N/A. Substandard: N/A.

PROJECT:Upgrades existing water, electrical, and wastewater distribution systems.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate utilities to accommodate aviation units relocating from the NavalAir Station (NAS), Barbers Point, Hawaii. Because of actions authorized byPublic Law 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NASBarbers Point will close, and operational, maintenance, support, andaviation units will be relocated to this station.

CURRENT SITUATION:Existing utility distribution systems do not have adequate capacity tosupport the units being relocated.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not have adequate utilities andservices to sustain the operation of relocating Navy aviation units. Thisstation will not be able to support the closure of Barbers Point.


A. Estimated Design Data: (Parametric estimates have been used todevelop project costs. Project design conforms to Part II of MilitaryHandbook 1190, Facility Planning and Design guide)(1) Status: (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05/96 (B) Date Design 35% Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08/96




1. Component




4. Project Title

UTILITIES UPGRADE

7. Project Number

P-504T

(…continued)

(C) Date Design Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12/96 (D) Percent Complete As Of September 1996. . . . . . . 75% (E) Percent Complete As Of January 1997. . . . . . . . 100%

(2) Basis: (A) Standard or Definitive Design: NO (B) Where Design Was Most Recently Used:







1. Component




4. Project Title

ORDNANCE FACILITIES

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

216.55

7. Project Number

P-508T


1,160

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)ORDNANCE FACILITIES BUILDING CONVERSIONS AND RENOVATIONS STORAGE BUILDING MISSILE MAGAZINESUPPORTING FACILITIES ELECTRICAL UTILITIES MECHANICAL UTILITIES PAVING, SITE IMPROVEMENT, AND DEMOLITION




m2LSm2m2-LSLSLS

--

--

--

83-

37 46

----

--

--

--

--------

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

720 (480) (50) (190) 320 (110) (110) (100)------- 1,040 50------- 1,090 70------- 1,160 (0)


Renovation and conversion of two buildings; earth covered arch concretemagazine, storage building for torepdoes; bridge crane, fire protectionsystem, extension of fenced areas, upgrading of dirt road, utilities,paving, site improvements, and demolition.

11. Requirement: 83 m2. Adequate: 0 m2. Substandard: (0) m2.

PROJECT:Constructs ordnance facilities for Navy aviation units relocating fromNaval Air Station (NAS), Barbers Point.

REQUIREMENT:Because of actions authorized by Public Law 101-510, the Defense BaseClosure and Realignment Act of 1990, NAS Barbers Point will close andaviation and support units will be relocated to this station. Adequateordnance facilities for storing torpedoes awaiting aircraft loading arerequired to accommodate this relocation.

CURRENT SITUATION:This station does not have adequate ordnance facilities to accommodate theoperational, maintenance, and support units being relocated from BarbersPoint. An aviation armament facility is available for joint use with theMarines to satisfy the bulk of the Navy's requirements. However, renovationand conversion to portions of the building will be necessary. The ordnanceassembly area needs to be renovated to accommodate live ordnance buildup.This includes installing a bridge crane and extending the fenced area.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not be able to provide adequateordnance facilities and storage space to support the relocating aviation




1. Component




4. Project Title

ORDNANCE FACILITIES

7. Project Number

P-508T

(…continued)

units. This station will not be able to support the closure of BarbersPoint



(1) Status: (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04/96 (B) Date Design 35% Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08/96 (C) Date Design Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/96 (D) Percent Complete As Of September 1996. . . . . . . 50% (E) Percent Complete As Of January 1997. . . . . . . . 100%








1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N62813

NAVAL STATION,PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII

4. Project Title

FLEET IMAGING CENTER

5. Program Element

0204796N

6. Category Code

141.65

7. Project Number

P-524T


1,005

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)FLEET IMAGING CENTERSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




LS-LSLS

--

--

--

----

--

--

--

----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

670 230 (210) (20)------- 900 50------- 950 55------- 1,005 (0)


Building renovations to provide photographic processing space with light-tight doorways to adjacent dark rooms, bathrooms, studio rooms, computerstudio room, office space, and vault; administrative space; standbygenerators, electronic ground system, security screening on windows,utilities, paving, and site improvement.


PROJECT:Renovates a building to house the Fleet Imaging Center, Pacific.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured facilities to accommodate the relocationof photographic processing and administrative spaces from the Naval AirStation (NAS), Barbers Point, Hawaii. Because of actions required byPublic Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,NAS Barbers Point will close and the Fleet Imaging Center, Pacific, willrelocate to this station.

CURRENT SITUATION:This station does not have sufficient photographic processing andassociated administrative space to accommodate the relocation of the FleetImaging Center, Pacific. This project will renovate a building formallyused as the Marine barracks galley, and currently used as a gym, storagefacility, and classroom, to accommodate the imaging center.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not have adequate facilities tohouse the Fleet Imaging Center.





1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N62813NAVAL STATION, PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII

4. Project Title

FLEET IMAGING CENTER

7. Project Number

P-524T

(…continued)


Installation POC: LCdr Roger Natsuhara, Phone: (808) 474-8190








1. Component



NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER,PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII

4. Project Title

UTILITY SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS

5. Program Element

0702096N

6. Category Code

842.10

7. Project Number

P-539T


1,492

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)UTILITY SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS WATER SUPPLY MODIFICATIONS ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS OILY WASTE HOLDING TANK




LSLSLSGL

--

--

--

---

55,000

--

--

--

---

2.00

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,330 (1,100) (120) (110)------- 1,330 70------- 1,400 92------- 1,492 (0)


Water and electrical distribution systems meters; lined steel holding tankwith concrete containment berm, stairway/catwalk, and reinforced concretetruck access ramp at oily waste landfarm.


PROJECT:Provides modifications to utility systems at the Naval Air Station (NAS),Barbers Point.

REQUIREMENT:Modifications to utility systems serving Navy housing to bring them intoconformance with public utilities standards to support transition fromgovernment ownership and operation. Because of actions authorized byPublic Law 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NASBarbers Point will close and operational, maintenance, aviation and supportunits will be relocated to the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), KaneoheBay, Hawaii.

CURRENT SITUATION:Utilities consumption metering for a majority of base facilities ismeasured by master meters on the incoming utilities services. Except forsome portions of the housing area and a small number of tenant buildings,the utilities consumption of smaller sections of the base and of individualbuildings cannot be measured. The utilities consumption of the facilitiesretained upon base closure cannot be determined from the present meteringconfiguration. Utilities consumption for Navy housing, morale, welfare,recreational, and support facilities will be difficult to assess and mayimpact the cost of these services to the Navy. The Oily Waste Landfarm atBarbers Point is the only facility available on Oahu for the remediation ofthe oily wastes from the Navy. Oily wastes removed from the sewage systemat Pearl Harbor, Schofield Barracks, and other Navy and DOD activities arestored and tested in a holding tank at Sewage Station 3R prior toremediation. This tank, which is a vital link in the operation of the



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N62755NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER, PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII

4. Project Title

UTILITY SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS

7. Project Number

P-539T

(…continued)


Installation POC: LCdr Ross Woodson, Phone: (808) 471-3926

Barbers Point Oily Waste Landfarm, is located outside of the proposedretention area and must be relocated to ensure the continued operation ofthe landfarm.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:This center may not be able to provide utility services at a reasonablecost to its customers.








1. Component




4. Project Title

BACHELOR QUARTERS

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

721.11

7. Project Number

P-286T


27,898

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)BACHELOR QUARTERS BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS BACHELOR OFFICERS QUARTERSSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS




m2m2m2-LS

--

--

--

12,170 5,481 6,689

--

--

--

--

-----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

20,030 (8,930)(11,100) 4,920 (4,920)------- 24,950 1,250------- 26,200 1,698------- 27,898 (0)


Two three-story bachelor enlisted quarters (BEQ) and two three-storybachelor officer quarters (BOQ); reinforced concrete masonry and steelframe buildings; built-up roofs, air conditioning, fire protection system;elevators, utilities, paving and site improvements. Grade mix: E6-E9 64.Officers: 83. Total: 147.

11. Requirement: 278 PN. Adequate: 95 PN. Substandard: (52) PN.

PROJECT:Provides facilities to house bachelor personnel.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured billeting facilities to support therelocation of Navy aviation operations. Because of actions required byPublic Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,the Naval Air Station (NAS), Barbers Point, Hawaii, will close, andoperational, maintenance, and support units will be relocated to thisstation.

CURRENT SITUATION:There are no existing facilities which can meet the requirement.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not have adequate billetingfacilities required to support the closure of Barbers Point


A. Estimated Design Data: (Parametric estimates have been used todevelop project costs. Project design conforms to Part II of MilitaryHandbook 1190, Facility Planning and Design guide)(1) Status: (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04/96



1. Component




4. Project Title

BACHELOR QUARTERS

7. Project Number

P-286T

(…continued)



(3) Total Cost (C) = (A) + (B) Or (D) + (E): (A) Production of Plans and Specifications . . . . . .(1,320) (B) All Other Design Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(1,100) (C) Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,420 (D) Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(2,200) (E) In-House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (220)



C. Real Property Maintenance (past two years) ($000): 0

D. Future requirements for unaccompanied housing at thisinstallation ($000): $0 (0PN)

Installation POC: LCdr J. Landis, Phone: (808) 257-2171


Closure/Realignment Location:NAS CECIL FIELD, FL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 4007 13471 493 14003 22542 28118 82634



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -1500 -2200 -12770 0 0 0 -16470Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 -300 -612 -722 -1634Operations & Maintenance -1856 -2615 -3304 -6373 -19897 -28747 -62792Military Personnel 0 -163 -236 -12315 -23149 -23643 -59506Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -19 ][ -37 ][ -54 ][ -352 ][ -352 ][ -352 ][ -1166 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -676 ][ -671 ][ -675 ][ -2028 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3356 -4978 -16310 -18988 -43658 -53112 -140402


Military Construction -1500 -2200 -12770 0 3383 0 -13087

Family Housing


Operations 0 0 0 -300 -612 -722 -1634


Compliance 2336 6000 100 0 3183 10807 22426

Restoration 1671 6000 0 8026 12012 11410 39119



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -19 ][ -37 ][ -54 ][ -352 ][ -352 ][ -352 ][ -1166 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -676 ][ -671 ][ -675 ][ -2028 ]


651 8493 -15817 -4985 -21116 -24994 -57768


Naval Air Station (NAS), Cecil Field will draw down in a phased mannerwith operational closure in September 1999, as a result of themodifications to the receiving sites per BRAC 1995 legislation. Theactivities located at NAS Cecil Field provide maintenance, training andhomeport support for assigned operational F/A-18 and S-3 Fleet AirSquadrons and reserve Navy and Marine Air Squadrons.

The DoD BRAC 1995 Commission impacts this closure. Most significantly,the F/A-18s will relocate to NAS Oceana vice MCAS Cherry Point. S-3aircraft will relocate to NAS Jacksonville, FL. Two Reserve F/A-18squadrons will relocate to NAS Atlanta, GA.



FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-831T JACKSONVILLE NAS AVIATION PHYSIOLOGY TRAINING BUI 3,383

Total 3,383


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.An environmental impact statement was started in January 1995 toanalyze the impacts associated with the disposal and reuse of NASCecil Field. Completion of the document is expected in FY 1997. Insupport of the relocation of assets to MCAS Cherry Point, anEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in FY 1994.Additionally, a cultural resources study was done in FY 1995. Due toBRAC 95 legislation this action has been redirected. The EIS washalted.

Two EAs were started in FY 1994 to analyze the impacts of relocationof assets to NAS Oceana and MCAS Beaufort. The EA for MCAS Beaufortwas completed in October 1994, and the EIS for NAS Oceana is

scheduled for completion in October 1997. Passage of BRAC 1995legislation as recommended by DoD has resulted in significant reworkof the current NEPA documentation.

Compliance:

Asbestos and lead based paint surveys are complete. Friable,accessible and damaged asbestos abatement is required. Minimal LeadBased Paint abatement is required in family housing areas prior totransfer. The Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) transformers have beenretrofilled or retrofitted. A Radon survey is complete, with nofurther action required. The Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)surveys are ongoing. The North Fuel Farm, which is the major storagefacility for the base, is undergoing a remediation to remove freeproduct and contaminated soil. The inactive USTs will either beclosed in place or removed, as well as the active tanks uponfacilities closure. A munitions and unexploded ordnance (UXO) surveywas completed in FY 1996 and all UXO removed and disposed. AnEnvironmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) havebeen completed.


NAS Cecil Field is listed on the National Priority List (NPL). TheIR program has 18 sites, and six areas of concern identified in theEBS. An interim record of decision (ROD) has been signed for foursites. The Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) iscomplete at two sites. One Interim Removal Action (IRA) is completeand another is underway. The balance of the sites move into theRemedial Actions phase in FY 1997.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocation of simulators, and tenant movingcosts. Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned closure. Also included are caretaker,real estate, and other related labor, support, and contractualrequirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the base.

Other:

There is a requirement to purchase equipment in support of FA/18aircraft operations, at their new location.


The property has been screened through the McKinney Act, state and localagencies according to the normal federal disposal process. This may

result in transfer to a homeless provider, discounted conveyance under avariety of statutory programs, including economic development purposes,or through negotiated sale. Proceeds for land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Savings are a result of the deletion of projects in the FYDP.


The family housing inventory at NAS Cecil Field consists of 297government owned units. Two hundred units, located 4 miles from NASCecil Field, will be retained to offset some of the PWC Jacksonvillerequirements. The remaining units will be deactivated as the basecloses.


Savings result from elimination of billets, and associated non-laborbase operations support at NAS Cecil Field. Includes civilian personnelsalary savings resulting from the closure. Receiving sites requireoperating budget increases to support transferring units.

Military Personnel:

Savings are the result of a reduction of total military billets.

1. Component



NAVAL AIR STATION,JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

4. Project Title

AVIATION PHYSIOLOGY TRAININGBUILDING

5. Program Element

0204696N

6. Category Code

171.20

7. Project Number

P-831T


3,383

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)AVIATION PHYSIOLOGY TRAINING BUILDING BUILDING RELOCATE HYPERBARIC CHAMBERSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING, AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




m2m2LS-LS

--

--

--

1,498 1,498

---

--

--

--

- 1,593.00

---

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

2,650

(2,390)

(260) 400

(400)------- 3,050 150------- 3,200 183------- 3,383

(0)


Two-story building, elevated first floor slab on foundation wall,steel framed second floor and roof; precast concrete panelexterior walls, built-up roof on top of lightweight concrete deck,high-bay area, training, medical treatment, recovery andmaintenance areas, sound treatment, hyperbaric chamber relocationand installation, parking area, fire protection system,information systems, air conditioning, and utilities.


PROJECT:Constructs an aviation physiology training unit (APTU) buildingfor training fleet personnel.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured facility to support the aviationphysiology training requirements being relocated from the NavalAir Station (NAS), Cecil Field, Florida. Because of actionsauthorized by Public Law 101-510, Defense Base Closure andRealignment Act of 1990, NAS Cecil Field will close and aviationphysiology training requirements will be relocated to thisstation. The current APTU serves aviators from NAS Jacksonville,NS Mayport, NAS Key West, and numerous other locations. The newAPTU will be located with the water survival facility at NASJacksonville, thereby providing a single site for aircrewcertification.

CURRENT SITUATION:



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC:N00207

NAVAL AIR STATION, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

4. Project Title

AVIATION PHYSIOLOGY TRAINING BUILDING

7. Project Number

P-831T

(…continued)

The Aviation Physiology Training Department is located in twodifferent buildings at NAS Cecil Field. With the closure of CecilField, this function will transfer to Jacksonville, which has nospace available for this mission.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:The APTU is critical to support of naval aviation in the area.Without this facility, this station cannot support the closure ofCecil Field.


A. Estimated Design Data: (Parametric estimates have beenused to develop project costs. Project design conforms to Part IIof Military Handbook 1190, Facility Planning and Design guide)

(1) Status: (A) Date Design Started. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 07/95 (B) Date Design 35% Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . 12/95 (C) Date Design Complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03/97 (D) Percent Complete As Of September 1996. . . . . . 35% (E) Percent Complete As Of January 1997. . . . . . . 80%


(3) Total Cost (C) = (A) + (B) Or (D) + (E): (A) Production of Plans and Specifications . . . . (210) (B) All Other Design Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . (63) (C) Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 (D) Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (237) (E) In-House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (36)

(4) Construction Start. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03/97


Installation POC: LCDR Brian Scott, Phone: (904) 722-2118


Closure/Realignment Location:NSY CHARLESTON, SC

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 93669 134741 114894 20062 13923 16115 393404



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 -2800 0 0 0 0 -2800Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 -88462 -91941 -93964 -96031 -370398Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -10194 -10419 -10647 -10882 -42142Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 1136 ][ -3392 ][ -5335 ][ -5507 ][ -5001 ][ -5564 ][ -23663 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -216 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -2800 -98656 -102360 -104611 -106913 -415340


Military Construction 7390 -2800 0 0 0 0 4590

Family Housing




Compliance 2677 27096 8686 336 2526 78 41399

Restoration 0 0 0 566 530 5207 6303



Other 0 80 -10194 -10419 -10647 -10882 -42062


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 1136 ][ -3392 ][ -5335 ][ -5507 ][ -5001 ][ -5564 ][ -23663 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -54 ][ -216 ]


93669 131941 16238 -82298 -90688 -90798 -21936


The Naval Shipyard (NSY), Charleston was operationally closed on 01April 1996.

There is a significant Steam Utility Contract buyout that hasapproximately 13 years remaining as of January 1997. The contractrequires a lump sum payment within 365 days of the contract termination.A reuse plan has been developed and provides the basis for NEPA andenvironmental actions.



FY1994 Amount ($000) -------P-364T NORFOLK NSY (PORTSMOUTH INTERMED MAINT ACTIVITY TRAIN FACILITY) 7,390

Subtotal 7,390

Total 7,390


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

An Environmental Assessment (EA) was done during FY 1995 to documentthe impact of allowing interim leasing of the base prior to finaldisposal. The EA addresses changes in land use and the potentialincrease in air and water emissions. The ROD was signed 7 May 1996.

Compliance:

Charleston Naval Base is divided into 12 Zones, A-L with some overlapbetween the components. Zones E and F represent the Naval Shipyard,Zones A-D, F, and G represent the Fleet and Industrial Supply Centerand Zones A-D and H-L represent the Naval Station. Construction forextraction wells for treatment of contaminated groundwater isscheduled to begin in FY97. This treatment is consistent throughoutCharleston Naval Base. Contaminated soil excavated from the removal

of underground storage tanks (USTs Zone E & F) will be treated. TheAsbestos and Lead Based Paint surveys are completed, and abatement ofAsbestos is underway. The Radon survey is complete with 4 facilitieswithin the Naval Base recording radon levels above action level(4pCi/L). Mitigation is not planned, but will be disclosed. In theinterim, administrative controls are in place to protect personnel.An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP)for the Naval Base have been completed.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocation of personnel, plant property andinventory, tenant moving costs, low-level radioactive waste disposal,dredge operations cessation, and other nuclear propulsion closure costs.Also included costs for radiological surveys and studies. Civilianpersonnel one-time costs contain employee transition assistance,severance entitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary tosupport the planned closure of the activity. Included as well are theShipyard's portion of a consolidated Charleston caretaker office andsupport, real estate, and other related labor, support, and contractualrequirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search, surveys and marketingefforts.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factor for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCScosts are based on the total end-strength assigned.

Other:

Funds are required to procure collateral equipment to support functionsrealigned to receiver sites.


The property has been screened through DoD, other federal, McKinneyAct, state and local agencies according to the normal federal disposalprocess. This may result in transfer to another federal agency, ahomeless provider, discounted conveyance under a variety of statutoryprograms, including economic development purposes, or through negotiatedor public sale. Proceeds for land sales will only be realized ifproperty is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Savings are the result of projects deleted from the FYDP.


Includes reductions in base operating support costs as well as civilianpersonnel salary savings resulting from the closure.

Military Personnel:


Other:

Includes DBOF and base support savings to regular shipyard customers.

Closure/Realignment Location:NS CHARLESTON, SC

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 15624 33630 18123 21233 5706 8976 103292



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 -3358 -3358Family Housing


Operations 0 -394 -402 -4019 -4108 -4198 -13121Operations & Maintenance -3055 -8779 -26169 -39055 -40212 -42212 -159482Military Personnel 0 -751 -21024 285 -21473 -41736 -84699Other 0 -3655 0 0 0 0 -3655Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -2 ][ -251 ][ -569 ][ -569 ][ -569 ][ -569 ][ -2529 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -44 ][ -1132 ][ -1093 ][ -1089 ][ -1085 ][ -4443 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3055 -13579 -47595 -42789 -65793 -91504 -264315


Military Construction 8720 17183 0 0 0 -3358 22545

Family Housing


Operations 0 -394 -402 -4019 -4108 -4198 -13121


Compliance 1978 500 4613 6112 556 4339 18098

Restoration 0 0 0 10003 2871 2533 15407

Operations & Maintenance 1571 1413 -13827 -33947 -37933 -40108 -122831

Military Personnel 0 5004 -19856 285 -21473 -41736 -77776

Other 0 -3655 0 0 0 0 -3655




12569 20051 -29472 -21556 -60087 -82528 -161023


The Naval Station (NAVSTA), Charleston provided support service toapproximately 40 homeported surface ships and submarines and associatedsupport tenant commands, including port services, magnetic silencing,security, fire protection, safety, telephones, housing and morale,welfare and recreation services. NAVSTA ceased mission in October 1995.Operational closure occured on 1 April 1996.

Environmental cleanup is anticipated to be completed for propertydisposal purposes by the end of 1999 with monitoring continuing into thefuture. A reuse plan has been developed and provides the basis for NEPAand environmental actions.



FY1994-1995 Amount ($000) -------P-401T INGLESIDE NS ADVANCED FFT PHASE I 6,370P-867T CHESAPEAKE NSGA OPERATIONS BUILDING ADD'NS & ALT 2,350P-049T INGLESIDE NS MINE WARFARE TRAINING SCHOOL PHA 6,730P-053T KINGS BAY NSB CBU OPERATIONS FACILITY 1,810P-054T CHARLESTON NWS MINE RECOVERY OPS AND SUPPORT FA 1,103P-364T CHARLESTON NWS RESERVE CARGO HANDLING/VEH MAINT 1,500P-868T CHESAPEAKE NSGA ACCESS ROADS/BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 710P-XX5T INGLESIDE NS ADVANCED FFT PHASE II 5,330 ------- Total 25,903


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.An Environmental Impact Statement was started in FY 1994 to analyzethe impacts resulting from Navy disposal of land and facilities atNAVSTA Charleston, NSY Charleston, and FISC Charleston, SC. Thelocal community is playing a major role in assisting the Navy in

developing reuse alternatives. Issues to be addressed in the EISinclude impacts to wetlands, endangered species, increased air andwater emissions, traffic, and land use changes resulting fromcommunity reuse. The ROD was signed on 7 May 1996.

Environmental Assessments (EA) were started in FY 1994 to analyze theimpacts of relocation of assets to NAVSTA Ingleside and NSGANorthwest. The NAVSTA Ingleside EA was completed in September 1994.The NSGA Northwest EA was completed in April 1995. Additionally,relocation of assets to NAVSTA Norfolk, NAVSTA Mayport, and NASCorpus Christi have been categorically excluded from further NEPAdocumentation.

Compliance:

Charleston Naval Base is divided into 12 Zones, A-L with some overlapbetween the components. Zones E and F represent the Naval Shipyard,Zones A-D, F, and G represent the Fleet and Industrial Supply Centerand Zones A-D and H-L represent the Naval Station. UndergroundStorage Tanks (USTs) in Zone I will be removed. No contaminated soilis anticipated. The Asbestos and Lead Based Paint surveys arecompleted, and abatement of Asbestos and Lead Based Paint areunderway. The Radon survey is complete with 4 facilities within theNaval Complex recording radon levels above action level (4pCi/L).Mitigation is not planned, but will be disclosed. There are 43 SolidWaste Management Unit (SWMU) sites that will undergo RCRA cleanupactions. There are 45 Area of Concern (AOC) sites that are similarto the cleanup actions of SWMUs. An Environmental Baseline Survey(EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) for the Naval Complex have beencompleted.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocation of personnel, trainers, plantproperty, inventory, facility modifications at gaining sites, and tenantmoving costs. Civilian personnel one-time costs contain employeetransition assistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change ofstation as necessary. Included as well are NS Charleston's share ofcosts for combined caretaker requirements of Charleston Naval Complex,real estate and other related labor, support and contractualrequirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average costs factor for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the base.

Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through DoD, other federal, McKinney Act,state and local agencies according to the normal federal disposalprocess. This may result in transfer to another federal agency, ahomeless provider, discounted conveyance under a variety of statutoryprograms, including economic development purposes, or through negotiatedor public sale. Proceeds for land sales will only be realized ifproperty is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Savings are the result of projects deleted from the FYDP.


The family housing inventory at NS Charleston consists of 586 governmentowned units. All units have closed.


Savings are the result of reduced civilian personnel salary costs andother base operating support costs.

Military Personnel:

Savings are the result of a reduction in miltary billets.

Other:

Procurement savings for operating forces support.

Closure/Realignment Location:FISC CHARLESTON, SC

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 3664 3900 10878 2588 3195 5566 29791



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 -3500 -6906 -7994 -7525 -7279 -33204Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other -460 -1860 -6953 -7498 -7294 -7208 -31273Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -76 ][ -164 ][ -239 ][ -239 ][ -239 ][ -239 ][ -1196 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -5 ][ -5 ][ -5 ][ -5 ][ -5 ][ -25 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -460 -5360 -13859 -15492 -14819 -14487 -64477



Family Housing




Compliance 0 0 5028 191 2019 2441 9679

Restoration 0 0 0 1153 546 2511 4210



Other -460 -1860 -6953 -7498 -7294 -7208 -31273




3204 -1460 -2981 -12904 -11624 -8921 -34686


Partially disestablish and close the Fleet Industrial Supply Center(FISC), Charleston. Relocate tenant activities into existing spaces invarious DoD facilities. Operational closure occured on 1 April 1996 atwhich time NAVFACENGCOM assumed claimancy of the base. The workload ofFISC Charleston moved with its customer's workload to receiving bases.

A reuse plan has been developed and provides the basis for NEPA andenvironmental actions. The DoD BRAC 1995 Commission recommendationsimpact this closure/realignment action.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

Studies are included under NS Charleston, SC.

Compliance:

Charleston, Naval Base is divided into 12 Zones, A-L with someoverlap between the components. Zones E & F represent the NavalShipyard, Zones A-D, F, and G represent the Fleet and IndustrialSupply Center and Zones A-D and H-L represent the Naval Station.Construction for extraction wells for treated contaminatedgroundwater is scheduled to begin in FY97. Contaminated soilexcavated from the removal of underground storage tanks (USTs Zone G)will be treated. This treatment is consistent throughout CharlestonNaval Station. The Asbestos and Lead Based Paint surveys arecompleted, and abatement of Asbestos is underway. The Radon surveyis complete with 4 facilities within the Naval Complex recordingradon levels above action level (4pCi/L). Mitigation is not planned,but will be disclosed. In the interim, administrative controls arein place to protect personnel. An Environmental Baseline Survey(EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) for the Naval Complex have beencompleted.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocation of personnel, property, andinventory, tenant moving costs and minor facility repair or renovationat new locations. Civilian personnel one-time costs contain employeetransition assistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change ofstation as necessary. Also included are FISC's share of costs forcombined caretaker requirements of Charleston Naval Complex, realestate, and other related labor, support and contractual requirementsnecessary to complete disposal of the property.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through DoD, other federal, McKinney Act,state and local agencies according to the normal federal disposalprocess. This may result in transfer to another federal agency, ahomeless provider, disc ounted conveyance under a variety of statutoryprograms, including economic development purposes, or through negotiatedor public sale. Proceeds for land sales will only be realized ifproperty is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:



Other:

Customer savings associated with the closure of a DBOF facility.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAS DALLAS, TX

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 14153 37249 84279 18480 9681 6838 170680



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -680 0 0 0 -820 0 -1500Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 375 377 385 396 1533Operations & Maintenance 3747 13059 9879 11173 11793 12034 61685Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 90 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 5 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 3067 13059 10254 11550 11358 12430 61718


Military Construction 8170 29150 69779 2010 -820 0 108289

Family Housing


Operations 0 0 375 377 385 396 1533


Compliance 3212 6000 2861 0 1513 441 14027

Restoration 0 0 0 8422 7531 3043 18996

Operations & Maintenance 5639 14799 21518 17933 12430 15388 87707


Other 0 0 0 291 0 0 291


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 15 ][ 90 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 1 ][ 5 ]


17220 50308 94533 30030 21039 19268 232398


Naval Air Station (NAS) Dallas will close in September 1998 followingthe relocation of all tenants. The largest portion of the property isleased from the city of Dallas. The activities located at NAS Dallassupport the operations and training of Naval Air Reserve squadrons andaugmentation units, as well as Marine Reserve aviation and ground units.Additionally, Dallas provides host support for the Naval ReserveIntelligence Command, Commander Fleet Logistics Support Wing, a NavalReserve Readiness Command, the Texas Air National Guard, the Army AirReserve, the Texas Army National Guard and other miscellaneousactivities. NAS Dallas and its tenant activities are in the process ofrelocating to NAS Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base (JRB), where the Navyhas assumed host responsibility.



FY1994-1996 Amount ($000) -------P-107T FORT WORTH NAS AVIATION FACILITIES PHASE I 40P-109T FORT WORTH NAS BASE UPGRADES PHASE I 2,140P-110T FORT WORTH NAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHASE I 2,645P-X25T FORT WORTH NAS HANGAR SUPPORT PHASE I 4,025P-122T FORT WORTH NAS HANGAR SUPPORT PHASE II 11,455P-123T FORT WORTH NAS TRAINING/ADMIN FAC ALTERATIONS P 3,500P-X24T FORT WORTH NAS AVIATION FACILITIES PHASE II 8,260P-X41T FORT WORTH NAS BASE UPGRADES PHASE II 5,200P-X42T FORT WORTH NAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHASE II 735P-101T FORT WORTH NAS BUILDING ALTERATIONS AND ADDN'S 9,523P-102T FORT WORTH NAS ACFT SUPPORT FACILITY 19,886P-103T FORT WORTH NAS MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC 4,510P-104T FORT WORTH NAS JET ENGINE TEST CELL 13,840P-106T FORT WORTH NAS ADMIN/SUPPLY BUILDING ALTERATION 4,560P-108T FORT WORTH NAS RESERVE TRAINING BUILDING 16,600P-140T FORT WORTH NAS ADMIN/SUPPLY BUILDING 860 Subtotal 107,779

FY1997 Amount ($000) -------P-121T FORT WORTH NAS CHILD CENTER DEVELOPMENT 2,010

Subtotal 2,010

Total 109,789


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared for thedisposal and reuse of the main base. An Environmental Assessment isbeing prepared for the disposal and reuse of the 9 non-contiguousfamily housing units located in Duncanville, TX.

An Environmental Impact Statement was completed by the Air Force andthe Navy in November 1994, which analyzed the impacts of the disposaland reuse of the former Carswell AFB, and the relocation of NASDallas assets to the new NAS Fort Worth JRB.

Compliance:

An asbestos survey was completed and abatement of the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos underway. The Lead Based Paint surveyis complete, with no abatement required. A Radon survey iscomplete, with no further action required. Twenty-five (25)Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) have been removed and 10 have beenclosed. Additional UST removals are scheduled after facilitiesclosure. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC CleanupPlan (BCP) for the Naval Air Station have been completed. The EBSidentified 211 areas of concern and 34 additional sites. TheResource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigationsare underway to address these sites.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the closure. Also included are caretaker, realestate, and other related labor, support, and contractual requirementsnecessary to complete disposal of the property.


All military personnel assigned to NAS Dallas will relocate to NAS FortWorth Joint Reserve Base. PCS costs have been derived by using theaverage cost factors for unit moves in most cases and for operationalmoves in all other cases.

Other:

Funds are required to procure collateral equipment to support functionsrealigned to receiver site.


The major portion of NAS Dallas is located on land leased from the Cityof Dallas. The remaining property has been screened through theMcKinney Act while the 9 non-contiguous housing units, located inDuncanville, TX, have been screened through the Homeless Assistance Actaccording to the normal federal disposal process. These actions mayresult in transfer to a homeless provider, discounted conveyance under avariety of statutory programs, including economic development purposes,or through negotiated sale. Proceeds for land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Savings are the result of the deletion of projects from the FYDP.


The family housing inventory at NAS Dallas consists of 11 governmentowned units. Operation of the 11 units will cease prior to operationalclosure of the base.


Increased costs resulting from increase of flight operations, civilianpersonnel, and base support costs due to additional tenants.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAF DETROIT, MI

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 2100 54 7447 3955 2105 318 15979



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -1264 -2298 -2365 -2432 -2502 -1845 -12706Military Personnel 0 -191 -359 -374 -385 -400 -1709Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -60 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -1264 -2489 -2724 -2806 -2887 -2245 -14415



Family Housing




Compliance 0 0 1486 1764 0 0 3250

Restoration 0 0 5961 2191 2105 318 10575


Military Personnel 2100 -191 -359 -374 -385 -400 391

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -12 ][ -60 ]


836 -2435 4723 1149 -782 -1927 1564


Naval Air Facility (NAF) Detroit (a tenant on Selfridge Air NationalGuard Base at Mt Clemons, MI) ceased operations in May 1994. Per BRAC1995 legislation, the Mt Clemons Marine Corps Reserve Center (MCRC)remains as a tenant of Selfridge ANGB.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

A Categorical Exclusion was completed in October 1994 for thedisposal and reuse of NAF Detroit.

Compliance:

An environmental baseline survey (EBS) was completed during FY1995 for the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act(CERFA). Some asbestos removal is scheduled for FY 1997.Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) and Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs)removals are planned for FY 1997.


Three areas of concern will be investigated in FY 1997 with anymajor remediations planned for FY 1998.


NAF Detroit occupied space leased from the Air Force. The lease hasbeen terminated.


PCS costs were derived by using the average cost factors for unit movesin most cases and for operational moves in all other cases.

Other:

No requirement.


None. NAF Detroit was a tenant activity.

SAVINGS:



Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NRTF DRIVER, VA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 1728 3775 3056 67 31 32 8689



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -848 -1713 0 0 0 0 -2561Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -848 -1713 0 0 0 0 -2561



Family Housing




Compliance 721 500 30 0 0 0 1251

Restoration 655 3000 2767 48 31 32 6533

Operations & Maintenance -736 -1438 259 19 0 0 -1896


Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




880 2062 3056 67 31 32 6128


Disestablish and close NRTF Driver, Virginia. Operational closure wasachieved in March 1994.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,national Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement was started in FY 1994 to analyze theimpacts of the disposal and reuse of NRTF Driver. Issues to beaddressed include impacts to wetlands, endangered species, increasewater and air emissions, traffic, and change in land use resultingfrom community reuse. Due to controversy over the reuse plan,administrative modifications to the EIS contract will be required inFY 1997.

Compliance:

The Asbestos survey is complete, with abatement of the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos completed. The Lead-Based Paintsurvey is complete, with no further action required. ThePolychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) survey identified areas near two PCBtranformers of past spill, which will be addressed during the parcelspecific lease/transfer actions. A Radon survey is complete, with nofurther action required. Several USTs have been identified, removedand all action is complete. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS)and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) for the Naval Radio Transmission Facilityhave been completed.


The Installation Restoration Program has been completed. The programstarted with eleven sites, five have been cleaned, and 6 have been

classified as no further action required. Long term monitoring is inprogress.




PCS Costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


The property will or has been screened through other federal, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfer to another federalagency, a homeless provider, discounted conveyance under a variety ofstatutory programs, including economic development purposes, or throughnegotiated or public sale. Proceeds for land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Elimination of funding for contractor support and utilities.

Closure/Realignment Location:MCAS EL TORO, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 26455 27631 297737 116297 130230 44228 642578



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -1950 -7430 -3596 -6920 0 0 -19896Family Housing

Construction -199 0 0 0 0 0 -199 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -1172 -2617 6680 24997 25234 28552 81674Military Personnel 0 9855 23617 -7689 -11570 -11666 2547Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -532 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -200 ][ -200 ][ -200 ][ -600 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3321 -192 26701 10388 13664 16886 64126


Military Construction -1950 -7430 263653 52463 48773 0 355509

Family Housing

Construction -199 0 0 0 0 0 -199



Compliance 6371 8241 13239 19813 19878 16438 83980

Restoration 16658 10300 1388 8116 24274 19264 80000

Operations & Maintenance -347 3731 21334 51047 58570 34188 168523

Military Personnel 1301 12197 24524 -4754 -7635 -8776 16857

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -133 ][ -532 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -200 ][ -200 ][ -200 ][ -600 ]


23134 27439 324438 126685 143894 61114 706704


The closure of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) El Toro, CA, and therelocation of its aircraft along with dedicated personnel, equipment andsupport to NAS Miramar, CA, and MCAS Camp Pendleton, CA, is expected tobe complete in July 1999. Some personnel and aircraft will also berelocated from MCAS Tustin, CA, to NAS Miramar, CA, and MCAS CampPendleton, CA, as a result of the Base Realignment and ClosureCommission (BRAC) of 1993 redirecting the Marine Corps to avoidconstruction of a new aviation facility at Marine Corps Air-GroundCombat Center Twentynine Palms, CA. The squadrons and relatedactivities at NAS Miramar will move to NAS Oceana, VA and NAS NorthIsland, CA to allow for the relocation of Marine Corps squadrons. TheDOD BRAC 95 recommendation impacts the above closure/realignment actionby moving HMT-302 to MCAS, New River instead of MCAS, Miramar. The moveto New River was completed in Second Quarter FY 1996 and the EIS at ElToro was completed in the First Quarter FY 1997.

Adjustments have been made to all applicable appropriations to reflectthe HMT-302 redirect.

HMH-363 was originally scheduled to deactivate prior to closure of ElToro and had no financial impact on previous BRAC III budgets. Thisdeactivation did not occur because of end-strength and operationaldecisions unrelated to BRAC. Consequently HMH-363 had to be consideredfor moving under BRAC and was subsequently redirected by BRAC IV toMCAF, Kaneohe Bay. For this reason, no adjustments have been made fromprevious budget submissions for HMH-363.



FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-002T MIRAMAR MCAS BEQ PHASE I 38,654P-016T MIRAMAR MCAS AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS COMPLEX 182,155P-026T CAMP PENDLETON MCAS AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON 14,320P-027T CAMP PENDLETON MCAS TRAINING/ADMIN FACILITY 3,160P-028T CAMP PENDLETON MCAS BEQ/PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER 10,750P-031T CAMP PENDLETON MCAS MAINTENANCE FACILITIES 18,210

Subtotal 267,249

FY1997 Amount ($000) -------P-013T MIRAMAR MCAS BEQ PHASE II 27,983P-017T MIRAMAR MCAS AIRCRAFT MAINT AND TRNG COMPLEX 25,320P-029T CAMP PENDLETON MCAS WHSE/SPECIAL STORAGE FACS 6,080

Subtotal 59,383

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-018T MIRAMAR MCAS SUPPORT FACS(FORMER P-005T & P-011T) 48,773

Subtotal 48,773

Total 375,405


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation orproperty disposal actions. Environmental studies costs includedAICUZ, Environmental Impact Statements, and studies to enablemitigation of impact of the moves to NAS Miramar.

Compliance:

Environmental Compliance costs include underground storage tank (UST)testing, removal and remediation; hazardous waste management; PCB andasbestos removal and remediation; solid waste managment, RCRA permitapplication/modification requirements; wetlands/endangered specieshabitat mitigation, and clean air and water monitoring.


MCAS El Toro is listed on the National Priorities List (NPL). Thereis a Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) which was signed in 1990. 25IR sites have been identified. Environmental restoration costsinclude the identification, investigation, and cleanup ofcurrent/prior hazardous waste sites in response to requirementsestablished by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocation costs, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time moving costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned closure of the activity. Also included

are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.Contractual costs cover appraisals, title searches, surveys, andmarketing efforts.


PCS costs have been derived using the average cost factors foroperational moves. The PCS costs are based on the total end-strengthassigned to the particular base, area, or realignment activity that isbeing affected by the BRAC 93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


The property will be screened through other federal agencies, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfer to another federalagency, a homeless provider, discounted conveyance under a variety ofstatutory programs, including economic development purposes, or throughnegotiated or public sale. Proceeds from land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market or discountedvalue.

SAVINGS:


Savings will result from cancellation of construction projects as aresult of this relocation. The projects range from hangar additions tostorage and other operational facilities.


Minor family housing construction savings will be realized forimprovements at MCAS El Toro.


Maintenance Real Property (MPR) and Base Operating Support (BOS) savingsat MCAS El Toro scale back spending to a minimum while personnel arerelocating to NAS Miramar. Increases at NAS Miramar reflectrequirements as Marines move into NAS Miramar. Civilian personnelsavings at MCAS El Toro are based on the savings at MCAS El Toro thatare offset by new costs at NAS Miramar. The net reduction in civilianpersonnel costs are due to a reduction in end-strength.

Military Personnel:

An increase above current Variable Housing Allowance/Basic Allowance forQuarters (VHA/BAQ) expenses will be required to address a shortage of

housing at MCAS Camp Pendleton and NAS Miramar. Military Personnelsavings reflect a reduction in Navy Medical and Dental personnel end-strength.



1. Component



MARINE CORPS AIR STATIONMIRAMAR, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

SUPPORT FACILITIES

5. Program Element

0206496M

6. Category Code

441.12

7. Project Number

P-018T


48,773

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)SUPPORT FACILITIES AIR/GROUND ORGANIC UNITS STORAGE BUILDINGS HAZARDOUS AND FLAMMABLE STOREHOUSE HAZARDOUS WASTE STOREHOUSE SEISMIC UPRGADE OF HANGAR MAINTENANCE HANGAR ALTERATIONS DENTAL CLINIC MEDICAL CLINIC POST OFFICE EXPANSION FAMILY SERVICES CENTERSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT ASBESTOS REMOVAL/DISPOSAL




LSM2M2M2LSM2M2M2M2M2-LSLS

--

--

--

- 31,137 2,550 45

- 5,546 1,877 4,171 448 530

---

--

--

--

- 678.00 1,232.00 1,232.00

- 308.00 762.00 1,519.00 737.00 1,351.00

---

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

36,330(21,110) (3,140) (60) (1,490) (1,710) (1,430) (6,340) (330) (720) 7,500 (7,310) (190)------- 43,830 2,190------- 46,020 2,753------- 48,773 (0)


Reinforced masonry, concrete and steel frame buildings, concretefoundations and floors, and built-up roofs; alterations to existing hangarto support change in aircraft types including addition of overhead cranesand structural reinforcements to support the crane loads; air conditioning,fire protection systems, sound attenuation, utilities, paving and siteimprovements, security fencing and lighting, environmental mitigation,asbestos removal and disposal; code compliance including accessibility,fire, safety, and seismic; and technical operating manuals.


PROJECT:Provides facilities, buildings, and utilities as required for community andoperational support for the new configuration of Marine Corps aircraftassets and support units relocation from MCAS El Toro and MCAS Tustin toNAS Miramar.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly configured facilities to accommodate the increasedloading of aircraft and aviation support units being relocated from MCAS ElToro and MCAS Tustin to NAS Miramar. Because of actions required by PublicLaw 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, additionalstorage, maintenance, medical, and community support facilities arerequired to support the Marine Corps mixture of fixed and rotary wingaircraft, tactical support equipment, and personnel loading. The change in




1. Component



MARINE CORPS AIR STATION MIRAMAR, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

SUPPORT FACILITIES

7. Project Number

P-018T

(…continued)

aircraft numbers and mixture creates a requirement for alterations toexisting hangar spaces. Helicopter hangars must also have overhead cranesto service the rotor heads. Additional community support, medical, anddental facilities are required to support the increased loading resultingfrom the realignment.

CURRENT SITUATION:Existing storage, community, medical, dental, and personnelsupport/services facilities at NAS Miramar do not meet the requirements offuture Marine Corps increased aircraft and personnel loading. The physicallayout of hangars at Miramar are not compatible with conducting maintenanceon helicopters. Aside from the much larger footprint, helicopter hangarsmust have overhead cranes to service the rotor heads.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Significant defiencies will exist in areas that have a direct adverseimpact on the quality of life of Marines and Sailors stationed at Miramar.Basic services in a community setting will not be available, with acorresponding detrimental effect on morale. Improper and non-securestorage of supplies and hazardous materials will result in safetyviolations, pilferage, deterioration of materials/supplies, andenvironmental contamination violations.





(3) Total Cost (C) = (A) + (B) Or (D) + (E): (A) Production of Plans and Specifications . . . . . .(2,640) (B) All Other Design Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(1,770) (C) Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,410 (D) Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(3,920) (E) In-House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (490)


Installation POC: Tony Ray, Phone: (714) 726-4341


1. Component



MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, MIRAMAR, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

SUPPORT FACILITIES

7. Project Number

P-018T

(…continued)

B. Equipment associated with this project which will be provided from otherappropriations: NONE.

Installation POC: Tony Ray, Phone: (714) 726-4341

Closure/Realignment Location:NAS GLENVIEW, IL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 6485 22585 12888 15436 28989 1666 88049



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 -1654 0 -5822 -7476Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 -187 -191 -196 -200 -204 -978Operations & Maintenance -6187 -7801 -15783 -15494 -14554 -13472 -73291Military Personnel 0 -7208 -15681 -15843 -16125 -16478 -71335Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -704 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -362 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -375 ][ -1874 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -6187 -15196 -31655 -33187 -30879 -35976 -153080


Military Construction 4250 10390 0 -1654 11348 -5822 18512

Family Housing


Operations 0 -187 -191 -196 -200 -204 -978


Compliance 995 6000 999 184 177 170 8525

Restoration 210 2000 8547 12657 15692 1418 40524



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -176 ][ -704 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -362 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -375 ][ -1874 ]


298 7389 -18767 -17751 -1890 -34310 -65031


Naval Air Station (NAS), Glenview operationally closed 30 September1995. All aircraft have completed relocation to receiving activities.A family housing parcel will be retained to support Naval TrainingCenter (NTC) Great Lakes. The local reuse plan has been completed. Anabandoned NIKE site, used by NAS Glenview as an outlying field (OLF), inLibertyville, IL is included in the Glenview closure package.



FY1994-1995 Amount ($000) -------P-135T FORT WORTH NAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHASE I 4,250P-700T FORT MCCOY ARMY RESERVE GUARD 7,100P-X43T FORT WORTH NAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHASE II 3,290

Subtotal 14,640

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-701T FORT MCCOY EQUIPMENT MAINT FAC 2,295P-906T ATLANTA NAS MARINE RESERVE TRAINING FAC 9,053

Subtotal 11,348

Total 25,988


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared for thedisposal and reuse of this activity. The Record of Decision (ROD)was issued 28 May 1996. A separate Environmental Assessment (EA)

will be prepared for disposal and reuse of Outlying Field (OLF)Libertyville. An activity funded cultural resources study is alsobeing coordinated with BRAC in-house funds.

Two EISs were completed for the relocation of NAS Glenview assets toNTC Great Lakes and NAS Fort Worth in October 1994 and November 1994respectively. Most of the air assets are being transferred to NASFort Worth (see NAS Dallas for associated costs).

Compliance:

An asbestos survey was completed, with abatement accomplished duringFY 1995 and FY 1996. The Lead Based Paint survey is complete, with nolead based paint abatement required. The Polychlorinated Biphenyls(PCB) survey was completed, with transformer removal accomplishedduring FY 1996. A Radon survey is completed, with no further actionrequired. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC CleanupPlan (BCP) for the Naval Air Station have been completed.Underground storage tank (UST) removals will be completed by end ofFY 1997.


Ten IR sites have been identified at the NAS Glenview. All sites arecurrently in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)phase. The EBS identified an additional 65 areas of concern whichare undergoing confirmatory sampling and site investigations.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary. Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other relatedlabor, support and contractual requirements necessary to completedisposal of the property.


Military personnel relocated with units to various sites. PCS costswere derived by using the average cost factors for unit moves in mostcases and operational moves in all other cases.

Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through the McKinney Act, as well asstate and local agencies according to the normal federal disposalprocess. The Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) is pursuing variousoptions to obtain property through a discounted conveyance under avariety of statutory programs, or through negotiated sale. Proceeds for

land sales will only be realized if property is transferred or sold atfair market value.

SAVINGS:


Savings result from removal of projects which were in the FYDP.


The Family Housing inventory at NAS Glenview consisted of 297 governmentowned units. Two hundred sixty two of these units have been retained tooffset some of the PWC Great Lakes requirements.


Includes civilian personnel salary and other base operating supportsavings resulting from the closure of the base.

Military Personnel:




1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: WZZ188

NAVAL MOBILE CONSTRUCTION BATTALION,FORT MCCOY, WISCONSIN

4. Project Title

EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FACILITY

5. Program Element

0702096N

6. Category Code

143.77

7. Project Number

P-701T


2,295

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FACILITY ADMINISTRATIVE SPACES MAINTENANCE SPACES OPERATIONAL SPACESSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING, AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




m2m2m2m2-LS

--

--

--

2,156 981 465 710

--

--

--

--

- 1,000.00 600.00 501.00

--

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,620 (980) (280) (360) 440 (440)------- 2,060 100------- 2,160 135------- 2,295 (0)


Steel-framed building, masonry exterior, reinforced concrete footings andfloor, exterior metal insulated roof and overhead doors, suspendedacoustical ceilings, interior finished walls with metal frames and doors;spaces include administration, tool, supply logistics support, lockers,toilets, and showers; fire protection systems, ventilation system,utilities, fencing, lighting, sidewalks and oil water separator; pavedparking and yard areas to support various types of construction equipment.


PROJECT:Provides operational storage and equipment maintenance facilities.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate storage and maintenance facilities to support Naval MobileConstruction Battalion 25 (NMCB-25) Headquarters and Readiness Support Sitefunctions which are relocating from NAS Glenview due to actions authorizedby Public Law 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.

CURRENT SITUATION:Headquarters and line components of NMCB-25 currently train and operate atNAS Glenview which has been slated for closure. Facilities to supportadministration, training, storage, and maintenance of relocating personneland equipment do not exist at Fort McCoy.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Administration, recruiting, retention, training and readiness of NMCB-25will be adversely impacted without provision of adequate training,operational and storage facilities. Fort McCoy will not be able to supportthe closure of NAS Glenview.



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC:WZZ188

NAVAL MOBILE CONSTRUCTION BATTALION, FORT MCCOY, WISCONSIN

4. Project Title

EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FACILITY

7. Project Number

P-701T

(…continued)








Installation POC: Chris Jennison, Phone: (608) 388-2106



1. Component



MARINE CORPS RESERVE CENTER,ATLANTA, GEORGIA

4. Project Title

MARINE CORPS RESERVE TRAININGFACILITY

5. Program Element

0505196N

6. Category Code

171.15

7. Project Number

P-906T


9,053

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)MARINE CORPS RESERVE TRAINING FACILITY BUILDING VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ARMORY WASH PAD WITH OIL/WATER/SAND SEPARATOR VEHICLE LOADING RAMPSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




LSLSLSLSLSLS-LSLS

--

--

--

---------

--

--

--

---------

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

6,590 (5,630) (610) (120) (200) (30) 1,550 (1,030) (520)------- 8,140 410------- 8,550 503------- 9,053 (0)


One two-story and one one-story metal-framed buildings with masonry walls,reinforced concrete foundations and floors, metal roofs, fire protectionsystem, air conditioning, and utilities.


PROJECT:Constructs a Marine Corps Reserve Training Facility.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate training facility to support Marine Corps Reserve units relocatingfrom NAS Glenview, Illinois, as a result of actions authorized by PublicLaw 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.

CURRENT SITUATION:The Marine Corps Reserve Facility is currently located at NAS Glenview, asite scheduled for closure. The Marine Corps Reserve tenants must relocateto allow the Navy to environmentally cleanup and excess the property forcommercial use. Adequate facilities do not exist at Atlanta to accommodatethe personnel relocating.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:The Marine Corps Reserve Training Facility at NAS Glenview cannot relocateto Atlanta, delaying the closure of NAS Glenview.



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N00196MARINE CORPS RESERVE CENTER, ATLANTA, GEORGIA

4. Project Title

MARINE CORPS RESERVE TRAINING FACILITY

7. Project Number

P-906T

(…continued)


Installation POC: LCol McGuire, Phone: (504) 678-6818








Closure/Realignment Location:SEAADSA INDIAN HEAD, MD

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -125 -504 -708 -720 -736 -752 -3545Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -4 ][ -9 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -57 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -125 -504 -708 -720 -736 -752 -3545



Family Housing








Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -4 ][ -9 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -11 ][ -57 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]


-125 -504 -708 -720 -736 -752 -3545


Disestablish Sea Automated Data Systems Activity (SEAADSA) in FY 1996and realign with NSWC Indian Head Division, Indian Head, MD. SEAADSA iscurrently a tenant of Indian Head, and will not physically relocate.SEAADSA positions transferred in place, on 17 May 1996, to NAVSEALOGCENDetachment, Atlantic and some positions were eliminated due toconsolidation efficiencies.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No NEPA documentation was required for the closure of SEAADSA becauseno land disposal was involved. A Categorical Exclusion was completedfor the relocation of assets from SEAADSA Indian Head to NSWC IndianHead, MD.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.



No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:



Closure/Realignment Location:NAS MEMPHIS, TN

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 11336 241297 155831 14527 5833 996 429820



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -2050 -4450 -1106 -9101 0 0 -16707Family Housing

Construction 0 0 -11600 0 0 0 -11600 Operations 0 0 -1089 -3327 -3400 -3475 -11291Operations & Maintenance -882 -3632 -9313 -29484 -30763 -31483 -105557Military Personnel 0 0 -8938 -18476 -19384 -19953 -66751Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -249 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -1429 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -87 ][ -481 ][ -508 ][ -514 ][ -514 ][ -2104 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -2932 -8082 -32046 -60388 -53547 -54911 -211906


Military Construction 3300 224928 113278 -9101 0 0 332405

Family Housing

Construction 0 0 -11600 0 0 0 -11600

Operations 0 0 -1089 -3327 -3400 -3475 -11291


Compliance 1531 4000 1188 4974 4644 408 16745

Restoration 0 0 0 2293 891 464 3648



Other 0 0 910 0 0 0 910


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -249 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -295 ][ -1429 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -87 ][ -481 ][ -508 ][ -514 ][ -514 ][ -2104 ]


8404 233215 123785 -45861 -47714 -53915 217914


The 1993 Commission recommended the realignment of Naval Air Station(NAS), Memphis and closure of a portion of the base. NAS realigned to aNaval Support Activity 30 September 1995. Tenant reductions andrelocations have begun. Others require replacement facilities which areunder construction with completion through FY 1997 at NAS Pensacola.The Bureau of Naval Personnel (BUPERS), Arlington, Virginia willrelocate to facilities vacated at NAS Memphis. Environmental cleanupis anticipated by September 2000. The DOD BRAC 1995 recommendationsimpact this closure/realignment action.



FY1994-1996

Amount

($000) -------P-131T FORT WORTH NAS HANGAR RENOVATIONS & EXPANSIONS 3,905P-677T PENSACOLA NAS U&SI PHASE I 1,445P-654T PENSACOLA NAS MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC 4,250P-656T PENSACOLA NAS BASIC HELO/AO SCHOOL PHASE I 45,989P-657T PENSACOLA NAS AE SCHOOL 10,200P-659T PENSACOLA NAS AVIATION SUPPORT TRAINING BUILDI 12,100P-660T PENSACOLA NAS APPLIED INSTRUCTION BUILDING 11,500P-662T PENSACOLA NAS SHORE AIRCRAFT FIRE & RESCUE TRN 7,610P-663T PENSACOLA NAS FIRE FIGHTER TRAINING FACILITY 2,250P-664T PENSACOLA NAS MARINE EXPEDITIONARY AIRFIELD 850P-665T PENSACOLA NAS FIRE MATS TRAINING MOCKUP 1,700P-666T PENSACOLA NAS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1,300P-672T PENSACOLA NAS ADMIN & SUPPORT FACILITIES 3,100P-673T PENSACOLA NAS BEQ(S) PHASE I 68,750P-675T PENSACOLA NAS ENLISTED MESS HALL 10,400P-676T PENSACOLA NAS MWR FACILITIES 16,324P-685T PENSACOLA NAS U&SI PHASE II 33,055P-686T PENSACOLA NAS CONSOLIDATED TRAINING BLDG PHASE 46,622P-687T PENSACOLA NAS BEQ(S) PHASE II 67,762 Subtotal 49,112

Total 49,112


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in 1994 to analyze thedisposal and reuse of the aviation portion of NAS Memphis. The localcommunity is playing a major role in assisting the Navy in developingreuse alternatives. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is beingprepared for the realignment site for the student training activitiesat NAS Memphis to NAS Pensacola.

An EIS was completed in December 1994 for the receiver siteconstruction and operations associated with the relocation of studenttraining activities from NAS Memphis.

Compliance:

An asbestos survey is complete, with abatement completion planned forFy 1997. The Lead Based Paint survey is complete, with no abatementrequired. There are no Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) transformersremaining. A Radon survey is complete, with no mitigation required.Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) survey is ongoing, some removals orclosures are anticipated. There are a total of 67 SWMUs base-wide;however, only 32 of the 67 are located in the 1,500 acres to beclosed and transferred. Full RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI)characterizations have been conducted on 12 of the 32 sites.Confirmatory Sampling Investigations (CSIs) have been conducted on 18of the sites. The remaining 2 of the 32 sites were classified asrequiring "no further action" and required neither a CSI or RFI.Based on the results of the characterization phase of theinvestigation and interim measure/voluntary corrective actionremovals at 9 of the sites (completed or scheduled to be completed),a total of 29 are now expected to be recommended for "no furtheraction." Rather than address the Corrective Measures Study (CMS) on aSWMU by SWMU basis, it will focus holistically on the two primaryenvironmental concerns: (1) petroleum contamination and (2) solventcontamination. The environmental investigation to date hassuccessfully narrowed the focus to these two primary concerns to theimpedance of property transfer. The investigations have foundcontamination of the fluvial groundwater aquifer with chlorinatedsolvents (primarily trichloroethylene - TCE), and contamination ofgroundwater with petroleum. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS)and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) have been completed.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and tenant moving costs. Civilian personnelone-time costs include employee transition assistance, severance

entitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary to supportthe planned realignment or closure of the activity. Also included arecaretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search, surveys, and marketingefforts.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCScosts are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

Collateral equipment costs associated with relocation requirements.


The property has been screened through McKinney, DoD and Federal, stateand local agencies according to the normal federal disposal process.This may result in transfer to a homeless provider, discountedconveyance under a variety of statutory programs, including economicdevelopment purposes, or through negotiated sale. Proceeds for landsales will only be realized if property is transferred or sold at fairmarket value.

SAVINGS:


Prior programmed projects canceled.




The family housing inventory at NAS Memphis consists of 1061 governmentowned units. These units will be retained for use by Bureau of NavalPersonnel families.


Reflects realignment of schools, primarily to NAS Pensacola,consolidation of reserve components at Carswell AFB, closure ofredundant tenant organizations, and reduction of excess personnel.Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NAF MIDWAY ISLAND

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 20050 17400 28632 5843 0 0 71925



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Military Personnel 0 -333 -336 -342 -348 -358 -1717Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -333 -336 -342 -348 -358 -1717



Family Housing




Compliance 7003 9000 11987 109 0 0 28099

Restoration 9060 500 8822 2144 0 0 20526



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




20050 17067 28296 5501 -348 -358 70208


Naval Air Facility (NAF), Midway Island, was operationally closedSeptember 1993. Personnel support facilities are remaining operationaluntil all Installation Restoration and other environmental remediationmeasures are completed. All other facilities have been turned over toThe United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)or demolished.

In May 1996, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service acceptedtransfer of NAF Midway Island in its entirety for reuse as a NationalWildlife Refuge. The early turnover by the Navy permits the USFWS tocontract with a private company to provide an air eco-tourism servicewhich will also provide a less expensive means for USFWS personnel toreach the island. As part of the agreement, the Navy must continue itsplanned environmental cleanup of the islands. This cleanup will becomplete by the end of FY 1997.

There are no further funding requirements.



FY1995 - 1996 Amount ($000) ------P-400T MIDWAY ISLAND NAF DEMOLITION 3,000P-401T MIDWAY ISLAND NAF DEMOLITION 3,000

Subtotal 6,000

FY1997 Amount ($000) ------P-402T MIDWAY ISLAND NAF DEMOLITION 3,000

Subtotal 3,000

Total 9,000


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. Inaccordance with NEPA, an Environmental Assessment (EA) was completedfor the construction of the landfill required for disposal of debriscreated by demolition of facilities for wildlife hazards mitigation.The disposal process was ultimately a transfer of NAF Midway Islandin its entirety from the Navy to the Department of Interior, U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with subsequent reuse as a NationalWildlife Refuge resulting in the completion of a CategoricalExclusion in November 1995.

A Cultural Resources Management Plan and Programmatic Agreement(CRMP/PA) was funded in FY 1994 and completed during FY 1996.

A Natural Resources Wildlife Hazards Survey was completed in FY1995. The survey identified the requirements for removal ormitigation of physical hazards under provisions of the Migratory BirdTreaty Act and the Endangered Species Act. The study findings wereimplemented under BRAC construction projects. A separate requirementexists for implementing natural resources protection mitigation tominimize impacts during individual environmental cleanup anddemolition actions through FY 1997. This includes on-site complianceand consultation visits and analyzing and projecting "bird takes" forrequired USFWS permits. The work is being performed by in-houseNAVFAC EFD personnel due to the rapid response required in view ofenvironmental cleanup schedules and the experience of Navy personnelin dealing with USFWS.

Compliance:

The Asbestos and Lead Based Paint surveys were completed, withasbestos and lead based paint abatement required for facilities notbeing demolished. A Radon survey was completed during FY 1994, withno mitigation required. All remaining polychlorinated biphenylcontaining equipment were removed in FY 1996. Compliancerequirements also include PCB abatement and operation and maintenancecost of the Fluid Injection Vacuum Extraction (FIVE) system. TheFIVE system was installed to remediate petroleum and contaminationfrom leaking USTs. One hundred seven (107) underground storage tankshave been removed.


The site inspection report completed in FY 1996 identified 100 sitesof concern, 42 of which were selected for investigation under theInstallation Restoration (IR) program. Remedial actions are on-going with a close out of all sites by June 1997.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and facilities management. Also includedare caretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search, surveys, and marketingefforts.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:

None.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAS MIRAMAR, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 62341 11616 18386 14988 2779 0 110110



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 -1301 0 -4873 -6174Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 2383 4888 6826 14097Operations & Maintenance 0 -71 0 -10440 -40221 -40880 -91612Military Personnel 0 -339 -6193 -21448 -26962 -22873 -77815Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -1 ][ -333 ][ -333 ][ -333 ][ -333 ][ -1333 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -22 ][ -351 ][ -900 ][ -894 ][ -898 ][ -3065 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -410 -6193 -30806 -62295 -61800 -161504



Family Housing

Construction 0 0 10300 0 0 0 10300

Operations 0 0 0 2383 4888 6826 14097






Other 0 5968 0 0 0 0 5968




62341 11206 12193 -15818 -59516 -61800 -51394


Navy aircraft squadrons and support tenants will be reassigned to otherNaval Air Stations. The projected date for transfer of Naval AirStation (NAS), Miramar, to U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) is 31 October 1997.The activities at NAS Miramar support tactical fighter and airborneearly warning aviation operations and training for the U.S. PacificFleet. NAS Miramar also provides support for Federal AviationAdministration (FAA), Naval Air Reserve squadrons and units, DefenseNuclear Agency research, Naval Consolidated Brig, Naval AlcoholRehabilitation Center, and 76 other miscellaneous tenants. Thefollowing is planned to support this realignment action:

o Relocation of Navy aviation squadrons to other Naval Air Stations(primarily NAS Lemoore).o Transfer the USMC from MCAS El Toro/MCAS Tustin.o Relocation of Navy TOPGUN fighter training and Carrier Airborne EarlyWarning School to NAS Fallon.o Single siting of Fleet Readiness Squadron to east coast air stations.

BRAC 95 redirected all west coast F-14 squadrons to NAS Oceana; and allwest coast E-2 squadrons to NAS North Island.



FY1994 Amount ($000) -------P-156T LEMOORE NAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHASE I 21,821P-308T FALLON NAS BOQ PHASE 16,870P-310T FALLON NAS ACFT PARKING APRON PHASE I 6,500P-312T FALLON NAS ACFT DIRECT FUELING STATION 1,200P-314T FALLON NAS ACADEMIC INST BLDG 6,500P-315T FALLON NAS AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR PHAS 8,950

Subtotal 61,841

FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-319T FALLON NAS DOMESTIC WATER STORAGE 2,230P-320T FALLON NAS WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 1,300

Subtotal 3,530

FY1997 Amount ($000) -------P-457T OCEANA NAS ENGINE MAINTENANCE SHOP ADD'NS 480P-XX1T FALLON NAS BOQ (PHASE II) 9,830

Subtotal 10,310

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-186T LEMOORE NAS CAG ADMIN OFFICE 2,586 Subtotal 2,586

Total 78,267


The following projects are required to provide housing for juniorenlisted (E1-E6) families migrating from San Diego: FY96 Amount Location/Project Title $(000) ------P-410T FALLON FAMILY HOUSING 10,300


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was completed in FY 1995 toanalyze the impacts of the relocation of assets to NAS Lemoore.Issues addressed in the EIS included impacts to wetlands, endangeredspecies, increased air and water emissions, traffic impacts, andchanges in land use resulting from realignment and associatedmilitary construction. The EIS included an airspace analysis toevaluate changes in air operations and an Air InstallationCompatibility Use Zone update and noise study to address attendantnoise and safety issues.

An Environmental Assessment (EA) was used to analyze the impacts ofrelocation of assets to NAS Fallon. Issues addressed in the EAincluded impacts to wetlands, endangered species, increased air andwater emissions, traffic impacts, and changes in land use resultingfrom the realignment and associated military construction. The EAalso included a noise study to analyze changes in air operations andattendant noise and safety issues. The EA was completed in FY 1994.Funding for NEPA documentation for the relocation of assets from NASMiramar to NAS Oceana has been included in the budget submittal forthe closure of NAS Cecil Field.

NAS Miramar is to be retained by the Department of the Navy andreused as a Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS).

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


NAS Miramar is a receiving site for the closures of MCAS Tustin and MCASEl Toro, respectively. Costs include: (1) special projects required atreceiving sites caused by relocation of activities; (2) transportation,packing/crating, freight, etc. for relocating all decommissioning/disestablishing activities (including tenants), demolishing, etc.,including costs to move simulators to NAS Oceana, NAS Norfolk, and NASLemoore; and (3) costs associated with realignment planning requirementsat NAS Miramar and all receiving sites, including collateral equipmentrequirements for projects in the year following the extra spacecompletion. Civilian personnel one-time costs include employeetransition assistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change ofstation as necessary to support the planned realignment of the activity.



Other:

Collateral equipment costs as a result of relocation requirements.


None.

SAVINGS:




Provides for the operation and maintenance cost for 602 additionalfamily housing units at Lemoore and 60 units at Fallon.


NAS Miramar is a realigning action, therefore, O&M reductions at theinstallation are offset by plus-up at receiving sites due to relocationof functions/activities. Net savings occur after FY 1997. RecurringMaintenance Real Property (MRP) at receiving sites occurs later inrealigning period. Includes civilian personnel salary savings resultingfrom the realignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:




1. Component



NAVAL AIR STATION,LEMOORE, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING

5. Program Element

0204696N

6. Category Code

610.10

7. Project Number

P-186T


2,586

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDINGSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES, PAVING, AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




m2-LS

--

--

--

1,380--

--

--

--

1,452.00--

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

2,000 320 (320)------- 2,320 120------- 2,440 146------- 2,586 (0)


Reinforced concrete building, pile foundation, concrete floor, masonrywalls, gypsum on metal stud partitions, sound attenuation, airconditioning, utilities, security fence, parking, paving, landscaping andsite improvements.


PROJECT:Provides an administrative office building and common supporting spaces toaccommodate expanding base operations of the Carrier Air Wings.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate facilities to house Navy aircraft, personnel, and equipment beingrelocated to this station. Because of actions authorized by Public Law101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, the Naval AirStation, Miramar will close, and aircraft, personnel, and equipment will berelocated to this station.

CURRENT SITUATION:The existing base loading already results in a deficiency in administrativeoffice space. There are no facilities which can be used to house theserelocating functions.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, this station will not be able to adequatelyaccommodate the relocating aircraft, personnel, and equipment. Thisstation cannot support the closure of Miramar because of a lack ofadministrative space.





1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N63042NAVAL AIR STATION, LEMOORE, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title


7. Project Number

P-186T

(…continued)


(2) Basis: (A) Standard or Definitive Design: NO (B) Where Design Was Most Recently Used: N/A




Installation POC: CDR Paul McMahon, Phone: (209) 988-4091


Closure/Realignment Location:NS MOBILE, AL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 1600 435 2 38 38 38 2151



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 -54 -55 -56 -57 -58 -280Operations & Maintenance -1717 -7019 -7063 -7075 -7105 -7127 -37106Military Personnel -2223 -5305 -6939 -7376 -7513 -7414 -36770Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -83 ][ -83 ][ -83 ][ -83 ][ -83 ][ -83 ][ -498 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -176 ][ -198 ][ -198 ][ -198 ][ -198 ][ -968 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3940 -12378 -14057 -14507 -14675 -14599 -74156



Family Housing


Operations 0 -54 -55 -56 -57 -58 -280


Compliance 0 50 0 0 0 0 50




Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




-2340 -11943 -14055 -14469 -14637 -14561 -72005


The Naval Station (NAVSTA) Mobile closed in June 1994. The FFGs (USSANTRIM and USS FLATLEY) from former NAVSTA Mobile have shifted homeportto NAVSTA Pascagoula. Ship Intermediate Maintenance Activity (SIMA)Mobile has consolidated with SIMA Pascagoula. The property was conveyedto the city of Mobile in June 1995.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions.Relocation of assets to NAVSTA Pascagoula has been categoricallyexcluded from further NEPA documentation.

NAVSTA Mobile was acquired from the City of Mobile. In acquiringthis property, the Navy agreed to return this property (reverterclause) to the City following a determination that this area wassurplus to the Navy. Therefore, since this property will revert tothe City, preparation of a disposal and reuse EIS was not required.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, warehousingservices, contract termination liability penalties with the Mobile GasCompany, and termination of utility service between the Alabama Power

Company and the USG, which required payment for the remaining monthsprior to the contract expiration date of September 1996. Civilianpersonnel one-time costs include employee transition assistance,severance entitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary.

Property was reverted to the City of Mobile under Economic DevelopmentConveyance (EDC) provisions. The EDC process requires annual monitoringin subsequent years.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS moves are based on the total end-strength assigned to the base.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Savings accrue from the closure of the Housing Referral Office.


Savings accrue from reduced base operating costs, and reduced civilianpersonnel salary savings.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NETC NEWPORT, RI

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 1334 1020 0 0 0 0 2354



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations -250 -1032 -1671 -1728 -1766 -1805 -8252Operations & Maintenance -2375 -3170 -3262 -2169 -2216 -2265 -15457Military Personnel -1202 -2451 -3485 -3303 -2892 -2914 -16247Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -9 ][ -9 ][ -9 ][ -9 ][ -9 ][ -9 ][ -54 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -63 ][ -74 ][ -71 ][ -65 ][ -65 ][ -338 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -3827 -6653 -8418 -7200 -6874 -6984 -39956



Family Housing


Operations -250 -1032 -1671 -1728 -1766 -1805 -8252






Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




-2493 -5633 -8418 -7200 -6874 -6984 -37602


Naval Education and Training Center (NETC) Newport terminated itsmission to berth ships in June 1994. Ships have beenrealigned/relocated to Naval Station (NS) Mayport, Florida, and NSNorfolk, Virginia. Piers, waterfront facilities, and related propertywill be retained by NETC Newport. The Education and Training Centerwill remain to satisfy its education and training mission.



FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-426T NEWPORT NETC PIER FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM 1,000

Total 1,000


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

Funding for National Environmental Policy Act documentation for therelocation of assets from NETC Newport to NS Norfolk and NS Mayporthas been included in budget submittals for the closure of NSCharleston, SC.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transition

assistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts.


PCS Costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


The family housing inventory at NETC Newport consists of 1851government-owned units. Operation of 400 units ceased during FY 1995.


Reduced base support pierside and closure of the SIMA. Includescivilian personnel salary savings resulting from the realignment orclosure of the activity.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:DOD FAMILY HOUSINGOFFICE, NIAGARA, NY

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 118 320 23 0 0 0 461



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 -760 -777 -794 -812 -3143Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -15 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -760 -777 -794 -812 -3143



Family Housing


Operations 0 0 -760 -777 -794 -812 -3143


Compliance 106 0 0 0 0 0 106




Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -3 ][ -15 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]


118 320 -737 -777 -794 -812 -2682


The DOD Family Housing at Niagara Falls, N.Y. has been disposed of byNavy. This facility had 111 family housing units located adjacent toNiagara Air Force Base. These units were managed by the HousingDepartment, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes, Illinois. The propertywas sold on 7 October 1995 for $1,113,000.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Assessment for the disposal and reuse of land andfacilities at DOD Family Housing Niagara was completed in September1995.

Compliance:

An asbestos and lead base paint survey has been conducted, and noabatement is required. An environmental baseline survey (EBS) hasbeen conducted for transfer of the property.


No requirement.


Costs include one-time operations and maintenance costs for theinactivation and preservation of the facilities and contract and in-house caretaker costs until the property is disposed. Real estate costsinclude real estate and other related labor, support and contractualrequirements necessary to complete disposition of the property.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through all levels of government and thehomeless. No interest was identified. The property was sold on 7October 1995 for $1,113,000.

SAVINGS:


The family housing inventory at DOD Niagara consisted of 111 governmentowned units. Operation of units ceased at the end of FY 1995.

Closure/Realignment Location:NADEP NORFOLK, VA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 15776 59965 83939 14171 11087 0 184938



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -17800 0 0 0 0 0 -17800Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -141 -1160 -3617 -26052 -26596 -26640 -84206Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 -25202 -25807 -26426 -77435Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -1005 ][ -2116 ][ -2116 ][ -2116 ][ -2116 ][ -9469 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -26 ][ -26 ][ -26 ][ -26 ][ -26 ][ -130 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -17941 -1160 -3617 -51254 -52403 -53066 -179441


Military Construction -17800 12600 0 0 5074 0 -126

Family Housing




Compliance 302 430 0 5046 0 0 5778


Operations & Maintenance 15333 45775 80285 -16927 -20583 -26640 77243


Other 0 0 0 -25202 -25807 -26426 -77435




-2165 58805 80322 -37083 -41316 -53066 5497


Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) Norfolk will close and it's workload willbe relocated to other depot maintenance activities at Cherry Point, NC,Jacksonville, FL, San Diego (North Island), CA and private industries.NADEP Norfolk is a tenant activity to Naval Air Station (NAS) Norfolk.Upon closure of NADEP Norfolk, the facilities and land will be retainedby NAS Norfolk. Mission cease date is Sepember 1997.



FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-219T JACKSONVILLE NADEP COMPONENT REWORK FAC REHAB 7,400P-221T JACKSONVILLE NADEP STORAGE FACILITY 2,400P-224T JACKSONVILLE NADEP ACFT ACOUSTICAL ENCL FAC 2,800

Subtotal 12,600

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-220T JACKSONVILLE NADEP ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 5,074

Subtotal 5,074

Total 17,674


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. No NEPAdocumentation was required for the closure of NADEP Norfolk becauseno land disposal was involved. A Categorical Exclusion (CE) wascompleted in FY 1994 for the relocation of assets from NADEP Norfolk

to NADEP North Island. No additional environmental studies fundingis required.

Compliance:

An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) was completed to documentenvironmental condition prior to transfer of property to COMNAVBASENorfolk and assumption of work in the DERA program.


No requirement.




PCS Costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCScosts are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Savings are the result of removing projects from the FYDP.


Savings reflected represent the aggregate savings of closing NADEPNorfolk and transitioning workload to NADEPs Cherry Point, Jacksonville,and North Island. Savings include civilian personnel salary savingsresulting from the realignment or closure of the activity.

Other:

Savings reflect procurements that will not be funded under the DBOFprogram because of base closure decisions and customer savingsassociated with the closure of depot facilities which had excesscapacity.



1. Component



NAVAL AVIATION DEPOT,JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA

4. Project Title


5. Program Element

0702096N

6. Category Code

610.10

7. Project Number

P-220T


5,074

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING BUILDING CONVERSIONS ENGINEERING LABORATORYSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES DEMOLITION PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




m2m2m2-LSLSLS

--

--

--

10,962 10,219 743

----

--

--

--

- 248.00 1,141.00

----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

3,380 (2,530) (850) 1,180 (200) (350) (630)------- 4,560 230------- 4,790 284------- 5,074 (0)


Conversion of seven bachelor enlisted quarters; alterations to existingstructural, electrical, mechanical, air conditioning, fire protectionsystems, and demolition; provide provisions for the handicapped;engineering laboratory, utilities, paving and site improvements.

11. Requirement: 10,962 m2. Adequate: 0 m2. Substandard: (110,000)m2.

PROJECT:Provides administrative and engineering laboratory space.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured facilities to support the realignment ofengineering and logistic support personnel associated with the F-14workload that will transition to Jacksonville from the Naval Aviation Depot(NAD), Norfolk, Virginia. Because of the existing excess capacity withinthe depot category, the Congressionally-approved 1993 Base Closure andRealignment Commission recommendations directed the closure of three of thesix Naval Aviation Depots, and the relocation of necessary repaircapability to the remaining three depots. As a result, the F-14 workloadcurrently being accomplished at the NAD Norfolk will be transferred to thisdepot.

CURRENT SITUATION:This depot does not have sufficient administrative and engineering labspace to accommodate the relocating personnel and functions. Sevenexisting barracks that have been determined to be excess to the needs ofthe Naval Air Station have been made available for conversion toaccommodate the additional engineering and logistics support workload andpersonnel from Norfolk. Currently, personnel are in leased space whichwill no longer be available after FY99. Leased space for the full



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N65886NAVAL AVIATION DEPOT, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

4. Project Title


7. Project Number

P-220T

(…continued)

complement of personnel relocating from NADEP Norfolk is not available inthe Jacksonville area.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, Jacksonville will not be able to provide theengineering and logistics support for the F-14 workload that will transferfrom Norfolk. This will severely limit the capability of the depot toprocess the F-14 workload required to support fleet operations.








Installation POC: Lt Matthew Haupt, Phone: (904) 772-2611


Closure/Realignment Location:NH OAKLAND, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 564 1100 13445 6030 18427 3780 43346



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 -4389 -4485 -8874Military Personnel 0 0 -5677 -11540 -11792 -12082 -41091Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -377 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -1514 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -952 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -5677 -11540 -16181 -16567 -49965



Family Housing




Compliance 397 1100 642 2059 3008 305 7511

Restoration 0 0 0 460 1084 0 1544

Operations & Maintenance 167 0 8463 3486 -1354 -1010 9752


Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -377 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -379 ][ -1514 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -238 ][ -952 ]


564 1100 7768 -5510 2246 -12787 -6619


Close Naval Hospital (NH) Oakland and associated branch clinics incoordination with realignment/closure of non-medical service assets inthe San Francisco/Oakland geographic area. NH Oakland closed inSeptember 1996. Additional facilities will be required at NH Bremertonto support an increase in base personnel and other beneficiariesresulting from base closure actions.



FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-019T BREMERTON NH OUTPATIENT CLINIC 10,409P-124T NSB SAN DIEGO PIER RENOVATION 891

Total 11,300


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in FY 1995 to analyzethe impacts resulting from Navy disposal of land and facilities at NHOakland. Issues to be addressed in the EIS include impacts towetlands, endangered species, increased air and water emissions,traffic impacts, and changes in land use resulting from communityreuse.

An Environmental Assessment was begun to analyze the impacts of therelocation of assets to NH Bremerton. The relocation of assets to NHOak Harbor and NAVMEDCEN Portsmouth has been categorically excludedfrom further NEPA documentation.

Compliance:

An asbestos survey is complete, and abatement for the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos is also ongoing. The Lead BasedPaint survey is complete and remediation is ongoing. There are noPolychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) issues. A Radon survey is complete,with no further action required. Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)are being removed or closed in place. Soil sampling and remediationis anticipated. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRACCleanup Plan (BCP) have been completed.


Costs are for removal and remediation of a solid waste managementunit and an underground storage tank.





Other:

None



SAVINGS:


None. Savings for family housing are included in the PWC San Franciscobudget.


Savings will result from elimination, attrition, or retirement ofcivilian personnel. The primary savings will result from eliminatinginfrastructure operations and maintenance costs.

Military Personnel:


1. Component



NAVAL HOSPITAL,BREMERTON, WASHINGTON

4. Project Title

MEDICAL CLINIC

5. Program Element 6. Category Code

510.10

7. Project Number

P-019T


10,409

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)MEDICAL CLINIC BUILDING PARKING STRUCTURESUPPORTING FACILITIES SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION FEATURES UTILITIES PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT DEMOLITION RELOCATABLE TRAILERS


TOTAL CONTRACT COSTSUPERVISION, INSPECTION, & OVERHEAD (6.0%)TOTALCATEGORY 'E' EQUIPMENT


m2m2m2-LSLSLS-LS

--

----

--

10,591 3,345 7,246

------

--

----

--

- 1,661.00 355.00

------

--

----

-(NON-ADD)

8,130 (5,560) (2,570) 1,220 (310) (380) (310) (40) (180)------- 9,350 470------- 9,820 589 10,409 0------- 10,409 (660)


Two-story steel frame building addition, pile foundation, concrete floors,built-up roof, pre-cast concrete facade, and double glazed solar bronzewindows to match the existing hospital; seismic design, fire protectionsystem, lobby, exam rooms, treatment rooms, administration spaces, andintegrated information/communication systems, utility connections, walks,curbs and gutters, parking and landscaping.


PROJECT:Constructs an addition to the hospital for primary health care services.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate medical facilities to support an increase in population in theNaval Hospital Bremerton catchment area. Because of Base Realignment andClosure actions, the beneficiary population is projected to reach 64,281.Additional medical facilities to support expanded primary health careservices and delivery are required to support this increase in population.

CURRENT SITUATION:Naval Hospital Bremerton is a 170 bed acute care hospital with two floorsof outpatient care, two floors of medical support services, a surgicalfloor, mechanical floor, and three floors of inpatient nursing units. Dueto military population growth and changes in the delivery of health careservices, the demand for outpatient services and administration/medicalsupport services has increased, causing encroachment on inpatient space andovercrowding of the hospital. This overcrowding will be further exacerbated



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N00254NAVAL HOSPITAL, BREMERTON, WASHINGTON

4. Project Title

MEDICAL CLINIC

7. Project Number

P-019T

(…continued)


Installation POC: Lt Craig Spray, Phone: (360) 478-9344

by the Base Closure actions. This project addresses only the outpatientcare requirements associated with the Base Closure population migration.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:The activity will be unable to support Base Realignment and Closure actions







B. Equipment associated with this project which will be provided fromother appropriations: Fiscal Year Equipment Procuring Appropriated Cost Nomenclature Appropriation Or Requested ($000) ------------------------------ ------------- ------------ --------- Medical Equipment O&MN 1997 7 O&M Medical Equipment OPN 1997 653 OP --------- TOTAL 660

1. Component



NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

PIER RENOVATION

5. Program Element

0204896N

6. Category Code

151.20

7. Project Number

P-124T


891

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)PIER RENOVATION FENDERING SYSTEM STEAM LINE UTILITY METERSUPPORTING FACILITIES DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL




LSLSmLS-LS

--

--

--

--

427---

--

--

--

--

1,115.00---

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

730 (230) (480) (20) 70 (70)------- 800 40------- 840 51------- 891 (0)


Alterations to existing submarine berthing pier, including replacingexisting wood fendering system with buckling columns and extending theexisting steam pipeline; demolition and removal of fendering system.


PROJECT:Provides an adequate berth for layberthing and rapid mobilization of theUSNS MERCY.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate berthing for USNS MERCY, which is required to be maintained at alayberth within 50 miles of its supporting medical center and to remain ina semi-active status, ready to mobilize within five days of notification.With the closure of MERCY's current supporting medical center, NavalMedical Center Oakland, the Naval Regional Medical Center, San Diego, willbecome her supporting medical center. Since her current layberth at FleetIndustrial Supply Center, Oakland is over 500 miles from San Diego, a newlayberth in San Diego Bay is required. A survey of San Diego facilitieshas shown Pier 5002 at Naval Submarine Base, San Diego to be the onlypractical location due to draft, pier width, and utility availability.

CURRENT SITUATION:Pier 5002 is in excellent structural condition, except approximately 400lineal feet of pier is unfendered, while the fendering on the remainingportion is not adequate for long-term berthing of a large surface vesselsuch as the MERCY. Utilities are adequate to support the MERCY except forthe steam supply. The steam distribution system does not extend to thispier.IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N63406NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

PIER RENOVATION

7. Project Number

P-124T

(…continued)

Installation POC: LTJG Wayne Mihailov, Phone: (619) 553-7144


Without this project, the USNS MERCY would have to remain berthed inOakland, jeopardizing her ability to mobilize quickly and to meet nationalobjectives of rapid fleet support.








Closure/Realignment Location:NH ORLANDO, FL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 162 5464 24998 290 0 0 30914



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Military Personnel 0 0 -2818 -5731 -5852 -5994 -20395Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -30 ][ -45 ][ -45 ][ -45 ][ -165 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -516 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -2818 -5731 -5852 -5994 -20395



Family Housing








Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -30 ][ -45 ][ -45 ][ -45 ][ -165 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -129 ][ -516 ]


162 5464 22180 -5441 -5852 -5994 10519


Naval Hospital (NAVHOSP), Orlando, closed and disestablished in phases.Operational control of the main hospital transferred to the VeteransAdministration in July 1995; final transfer expected in FY 1997.Remaining clinics at NTC Orlando under the aegis of NAVHOSP Orlando willremain open to support the Nuclear Power School until its closure.Medical and dental functions of NAVHOSP Orlando will migrate to NTCGreat Lakes, NSB New London, and other Navy medical activities.



FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-584T GREAT LAKES RTC MEDICAL CLINIC ADDITION 3,277P-586T GREAT LAKES RTC MEDICAL CLINIC ADDITION 4,219P-590T GREAT LAKES RTC MEDICAL CLINIC 10,555P-604T GREAT LAKES RTC DENTAL CLINIC 5,549

Subtotal 23,600

Total 23,600


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. ACategorical Exclusion was completed in October 1994 for the transferof NAVHOSP Orlando to the Veterans Administration. A small cost wasincurred in FY 1994 by the cognizant Engineering Field Division.

Relocation of assets to NAVHOSP Jacksonville and NAVHOSP Great Lakeshas been categorically excluded from further NEPA documentation. Asmall cost was incurred in FY 1994 by the cognizant Engineering FieldDivision.

Compliance:

No requirement. Funds were previously provided to remove, close, ormonitor Underground Storage Tanks, conduct asbestos surveys and abateexisting health hazards, and conduct lead paint surveys and abatehazardous conditions as required.


No requirement. Funds were previously provided for a RemedialInvestigation and Feasibility Study for an old landfill.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Also included are real estate and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.


PCS costs were derived by using the average cost factors for unit movesin most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCS costsare based on the total end-strength assigned to the particular base,area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC 93recommendations.

Other:

Collateral equipment costs associated with relocation requirements.


None.

SAVINGS:

Military Personnel:

Savings of pay and allowances will result from reduction of officers andenlisted personnel. However, most patient care providers will migrateto other locations.

Closure/Realignment Location:NTC ORLANDO, FL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 15868 62587 46218 11518 7843 2247 146281



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 -7100 0 -677 -319 -8096Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 -1884 -4812 -4918 -11614Operations & Maintenance 1086 -4263 -9338 -10453 -16811 -17642 -57421Military Personnel 0 -8406 -9956 -8112 -3942 -4888 -35304Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -112 ][ -236 ][ -378 ][ -378 ][ -378 ][ -1482 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -248 ][ -159 ][ -420 ][ -438 ][ -442 ][ -1707 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 1086 -12669 -26394 -20449 -26242 -27767 -112435



Family Housing


Operations 0 0 0 -1884 -4812 -4918 -11614


Compliance 1513 2538 0 2198 1148 1075 8472

Restoration 1508 6000 3529 2875 3819 619 18350



Other 0 0 308 243 0 0 551




16954 49918 19824 -8931 -18399 -25520 33846


Close the Naval Training Center (NTC), Orlando, and relocate certainpersonnel, equipment and support to NTC Great Lakes, and otherlocations, consistent with training requirements. Operational closuredate is planned for FY 1999. Disposition of major tenants is asfollows: Recruit Training Command (RTC) relocated to NTC Great Lakes,March 1995; Service School Command (SSC) was relocated to NTC GreatLakes May 1996; Naval Nuclear Power Training Command and theMedical/Dental Clinic relocates to Naval Weapons Station Charleston, byDecember 1998. Other tenant and support activities will relocate, byOctober 1998, to NTC Great Lakes or NAS Jacksonville, or bedisestablished. The DOD BRAC 1995 recommendations impact this closureaction.



FY1994-1996 Amount ($000) -------P-550T GREAT LAKES NTC MESS HALL MODERNIZATION 6,710P-575T GREAT LAKES NTC ELECTRONIC TECHNICAL TRAINING BU 215P-585T GREAT LAKES NTC BEQ MODIFICATIONS 2,500P-588T GREAT LAKES NTC BEQ RENOVATIONS 325P-589T GREAT LAKES NTC MESS HALL UPGRADE 20P-591T GREAT LAKES NTC SMALL ARMS RANGE UPGRADE 460P-592T GREAT LAKES NTC DRILL FIELD UPGRADE 470

P-515T GREAT LAKES NTC INDOOR SMALL ARMS RANGE 4,600P-576T GREAT LAKES NTC RADIAC CALIBRATION TRAIN FAC 400P-580T GREAT LAKES NTC COLD STORAGE WAREHOUSE 1,920P-581T GREAT LAKES NTC TRAINING BUILDING RENOVATIONS 0P-582T GREAT LAKES NTC BEQ RENOVATIONS 10,020P-597T GREAT LAKES NTC SEAMAN APPRENTICE SCHOOL 6,100P-599T GREAT LAKES NTC BEQ PHASE I 19,600P-605T GREAT LAKES NTC AIRMAN APPRENTICE TRAINING FACIL 5,300P164T GREAT LAKES NTC FIRE STATION 2,560P-579T GREAT LAKES NTC BRIG 420P-583T GREAT LAKES NTC CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 1,460P-619T GREAT LAKES NTC BEQ PHASE II 30,620

Subtotal 93,700

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-001T ORLANDO FACILITY MODS 2,686

Subtotal 2,686

Total 96,386


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was completed in FY 1996 toanalyze the impacts resulting from Navy disposal of land andfacilities at NTC Orlando. Issues to be addressed in the EIS includeimpacts to wetlands, endangered species, increased air and wateremissions, traffic impacts and changes in land use resulting fromcommunity reuse. Prior to actual disposal of NTC property, it islikely that the Navy will allow interim use of the property underlease agreements. The Record of Decision was signed 15 November1996.

An EIS was completed in FY 1995 for the relocation of assets fromNTC Orlando, NTC San Diego, and NAVHOSP Orlando to NTC Great Lakes.An Environmental Assessment (EA) was begun in FY 1994 to analyze theimpacts of relocation of assets to NSB New London. BRAC IVrecommended these assets be redirected to NWS Charleston.

An Environmental Assessment was also begun in FY 1994 for therelocation of the Nuclear Power Training School and nuclear “A”School from NTC Orlando to NSB New London, however this has also beenredirected to NWS Charleston.

Compliance:

The asbestos survey is complete, with abatement of the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos to be accomplished in FY 1997 and FY1998. The Lead Based Paint survey is complete, with minimal abatementrequired. The Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCBs) survey indicated tentransformers containing PCB. Removal or Retrofill actions areplanned. A Radon survey is complete, with no further actionrequired. Two hundered fifty-two (252) Underground Storage Tanks(USTs) have been identified. Sixty-two (62) USTs have been removaledand 30 assessments processed. The balance of UST removals orclosures will be accomplished after facilities' closure. Soilremediation and monitoring actions are planned at the UST locations.An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP)for the Naval Training Center have been completed. Site specificEBSs are planned.


Fifty-three (53) IR sites identified by the EBS have been or arebeing investigated. All sites are currently in the SiteInvestigation (SI) or Remedial Investigation (RI) phases. RemedialActions are planned at most of these sites.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and tenant moving costs. Civilian personnelone-time costs include employee transition assistance, severanceentitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary to supportthe planned realignment or closure of the activity. Also included arecaretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search, surveys, and marketingefforts.



Other:

Procurement of collateral equipment.


The property has been screened through Homeless Assistance Act, DoD andFederal, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfer to a homeless provider,discounted conveyance under a variety of statutory programs, includingeconomic development purposes, or through negotiated sale. Proceeds forland sales will only be realized if property is transferred or sold atfair market value.

SAVINGS:




Savings are as a result of a reduction in family housing operationscosts.


Reflects closure of schools at NTC Orlando and realignment of continuingclassroom requirements to NTC Great Lakes and NWS Charleston. Redundantsupport activities will disestablish and excess personnel will beseparated. Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:

Savings are as a result of a reduction in military billets.

1. Component



TAFT ARMY RESERVE CENTER,ORLANDO, FLORIDA

4. Project Title

FACILITY MODIFICATIONS

5. Program Element

0804731N

6. Category Code

214.20

7. Project Number

P-001T


2,686

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)FACILITY MODIFICATIONS STORAGE BUILDINGS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE BUILDING ADDITION MAINTENANCE BUILDING ALTERATIONSSUPPORTING FACILITIES ELECTRICAL UTILITIES FENCING PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS




m2m2m2m2-LSLSLS

--

--

--

2,506 1,369 615 522

----

--

--

--

- 685.00 1,181.00 432.00

----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,900 (940) (730) (230) 520 (110) (30) (380)------- 2,420 120------- 2,540 146------- 2,686 (0)


Three unheated metal storage buildings, modify and construct addition toexisting masonry maintenance building; lighting, fencing, parking, fencerelocation, grading, drainage, and utilities.


PROJECT:Provides storage and maintenance facilities.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured storage and maintenance facilities forunits and activities which are relocating to this center from the NavalTraining Center (NTC), Orlando, Florida. Because of actions authorized byPublic Law 101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NTCOrlando will close and this center will receive additional units andactivities which need storage and maintenance facilities.

CURRENT SITUATION:There are no facilities available at this center to accommodate themaintenance and equipment storage requirements of units and activitiescurrently operating from Navy-owned facilities at NTC Orlando Annex andwhich are to be relocated to this center.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, units and activities scheduled to relocate from NTCOrlando will be delayed, impacting the closure of NTC Orlando.



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N65928TAFT ARMY RESERVE CENTER, ORLANDO, FLORIDA

4. Project Title

FACILITY MODIFICATIONS

7. Project Number

P-001T

(…continued)








Installation POC:Ed Gill, Phone: (904) 452-5733


Closure/Realignment Location:NADEP PENSACOLA, FL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 53889 51219 19938 3354 114 0 128514



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 -1453 0 0 -1453Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 -48129 -49284 -50467 -51678 -199558Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -24794 -25389 -25998 -26622 -102803Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 348 ][ -818 ][ -1136 ][ -1136 ][ -1136 ][ -1136 ][ -5014 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -36 ][ -36 ][ -36 ][ -36 ][ -36 ][ -180 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -72923 -76126 -76465 -78300 -303814


Military Construction 21500 0 0 -1453 0 0 20047

Family Housing




Compliance 34 1936 0 0 0 0 1970




Other 0 0 -24794 -25389 -25998 -26622 -102803




53889 51219 -52985 -72772 -76351 -78300 -175300


Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) Pensacola closed on 31 March 1996 and itsworkload relocated to other depot maintenance activities at CherryPoint, NC; Jacksonville, FL; and San Diego (North Island), CA and theprivate sector.



FY1994 Amount ($000) -------P-962T CHERRY POINT NADEP OFFICE BUILDING 8,177P-965T CHERRY POINT NADEP HANGAR ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS 9,823P-966T CHERRY POINT NADEP ACFT ACCESS SHOPS ADD'NS 3,500

Subtotal 21,500

Total 21,500


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. ACategorical Exclusion was completed in FY 1994 for the disposal andreuse of NADEP Pensacola, FL.

An Environmental Assessment (EA) was completed in July 1994 for therelocation of assets from NADEP Pensacola to NADEP Cherry Point. Noadditional environmental studies funds are required for this action.

Compliance:

An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) was completed to documentenvironmental conditions prior to transfer of property to NASPensacola and assumption of work in the DERA program.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and relocation of personnel, plant property,tools and inventories. Civilian personnel one-time costs includeemployee transition assistance, severance entitlements, and permanentchange of station as necessary to support the planned closure of theactivity. Costs also include repair and minor construction costs forprojects to prepare hangar spaces to accept new transitioned aircraftand dynamic component workload and to accommodate additional equipmentand processes.


PCS Costs were derived by using the average cost factors for unit movesin most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCS costsare based on the total end-strength assigned to the particular base,area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC 93recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:




Savings reflected represent the aggregate savings of closing NADEPPensacola and transitioning workload to NADEPs Cherry Point,Jacksonville, and North Island. Savings include civilian personnelsalary savings resulting from the realignment or closure of theactivity.

Military Personnel:


Other:

Savings reflect procurements that will not be funded under the DBOFprogram because of base closure decisions and customer savingsassociated with the closure of depot facilities which had excesscapacity.

Closure/Realignment Location:FISC PENSACOLA, FL

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 1572 1351 2396 202 0 0 5521



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 -569 0 0 0 -569Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 -1753 -3360 -10408 -10767 -10822 -37110Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -4050 -4000 -3950 -3950 -15950Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -10 ][ -31 ][ -67 ][ -85 ][ -85 ][ -85 ][ -363 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -17 ][ -17 ][ -17 ][ -17 ][ -17 ][ -85 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -1753 -7979 -14408 -14717 -14772 -53629


Military Construction 0 0 -569 0 0 0 -569

Family Housing






Operations & Maintenance 1572 -424 -964 -10206 -10767 -10822 -31611


Other 0 0 -4050 -4000 -3950 -3950 -15950




1572 -402 -5583 -14206 -14717 -14772 -48108


The Fleet and Industrial Supply Center (FISC) in Pensacola, Florida,closed in September 1995. FISC Pensacola supported Fleet units in theGulf of Mexico homeport sites at Ingleside, Texas, and Pascagoula,Mississippi, numerous shore facilities within the Pensacola geographicarea, and provided industrial support for Naval Aviation Depot,Pensacola, Florida. FISC Pensacola was host for the DefenseDistribution Depot, Pensacola, which also closed. Some residualfunctions of FISC transferred to NAS Pensacola for continued support inthe geographic area. No property will be excessed, since FISC was atenant of NAS Pensacola.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, and tenant moving costs. Civilian personnelone-time costs include employee transition assistance, severanceentitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary to supportthe planned realignment or closure of the activity. Also included arecaretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.

Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search, surveys, and marketingefforts.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average costs factors for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCScosts are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularbase, area, or realignment activity that is being affected by the BRAC93 recommendations.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Projects which were in the FYDP were cancelled.


Operational savings accrue from the elimination of positions because ofBRAC. Positions that were eliminated because of previously existingbudget constraints were not included in the savings calculation.Positions transferred to other activities were also excluded from thesavings calculation.

Other:

Customer savings associated with the closure of a DBOF facility.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAVAL CIVIL ENGINEERINGLAB, PORT HUENEME, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 11232 15350 3381 0 0 0 29963



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 -1582 -1614 -1643 -1680 -1717 -8236Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -2421 -2464 -2520 -2576 -9981Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -49 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -305 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -1 ][ -1 ][ -10 ][ -12 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -1582 -4035 -4107 -4200 -4293 -18217



Family Housing




Compliance 116 2000 1695 0 0 0 3811

Restoration 66 100 354 0 0 0 520



Other 0 0 -2421 -2464 -2520 -2576 -9981


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -49 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -64 ][ -305 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -1 ][ -1 ][ -10 ][ -12 ]


11232 13768 -654 -4107 -4200 -4293 11746


The Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory (NCEL) closed in April 1996. Allnecessary functions, personnel, equipment, and support were transferredand realigned with Underwater Construction Team TWO and the NavalFacilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC), located at the NavalConstruction Battalion Center (NCBC), Port Hueneme, California.



FY1994-1995 Amount ($000) -------P-012T PORT HUENEME NCBC NAVFAC ENGINEERING SERVICE CNTR 11,050P-013T PORT HUENEME NCBC NAVFAC ENGINEERING SERVICE CNTR 9,550

Total 20,600


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been completed to analyzethe impacts resulting from Navy disposal and reuse of land andfacilities. Issues addressed in the EIS include impacts to wetlands,endangered species, increased air and water emissions, trafficimpacts, and changes in land use resulting from community reuse. AnEnvironmental Assessment (EA) was completed in-house for therelocation construction at NCBC Port Hueneme. High local reuseinterest and controversy required extensive NEPA documentationprocess and coordination.

Compliance:

An asbestos inventory is complete, and abatement for the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos is complete. Lead Based PaintAbatement is not planned since there are no housing units at NCEL.There is one Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) transformer remaining

which is currently in compliance. A Radon survey is complete, withno mitigation required. Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) have beenremoved. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC CleanupPlan (BCP) for the NCEL have been completed.


Three IR sites were identified at the NCEL. One site was recommendedfor no further action. Action is complete at the other two sites.


Costs include temporary modular facilities for functions displaced bynew construction, equipment removal and transportation, and initialoutfitting required by the new facility. Civilian personnel one-timecosts include employee transition assistance, severance entitlements,and permanent change of station as necessary. Also included arecaretaker, real estate, and other related labor, support, andcontractual requirements necessary to complete disposal of the property.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.



SAVINGS:


Operations and maintenance costs of the new facilities are expected tobe lower than those at the current site.

Other:

Customer savings as a result of the closure of a DBOF activity.

Closure/Realignment Location:SUBMEPP PORTSMOUTH, NH

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 45 1700 145 1239 264 0 3393



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -354 -2502 -3992 -4606 -5103 -5630 -22187Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -439 -1170 -1593 -2678 -5880Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -12 ][ -16 ][ -23 ][ -39 ][ -48 ][ -68 ][ -206 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -354 -2502 -4431 -5776 -6696 -8308 -28067



Family Housing








Other 0 0 -439 -1170 -1593 -2678 -5880




-309 -802 -4286 -4537 -6432 -8308 -24674


Submarine Maintenance, Engineering, Planning, and Procurement (SUBMEPP),presently in leased space in Portsmouth, will be disestablished andrealigned as a tenant in government owned space in the Portsmouth NavalShipyard.



FY1995 AMOUNT ($000) ------256T KITTERY ME PORTSMOUTH NSY ADMIN BUILDING MODS 1,700

Total: 1,700

A reprogramming package has been submitted to make this an FY-96project.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.

Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Includes elimination of lease cost and reduced civilian end-strength toensure balance between capacity and future force and resource levels.

Other:

Savings in budgeted Ship Construction Navy costs for General andAdministrative overhead.

Closure/Realignment Location:WESTERN DIVISION, NAVFAC,SAN BRUNO, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL






SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 -541 -1548 -2089Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -18 ][ -24 ][ -42 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 0 0 -541 -1548 -2089



Family Housing








Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -18 ][ -24 ][ -42 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]


0 0 0 0 -541 -1548 -2089


Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, San Bruno,California, was realigned from a direct reporting engineering fielddivision (EFD) to an engineering field activity (EFA). As EFA West, itretains necessary facilities, personnel, and equipment to support theregional realignments and closures in the San Francisco Bay area. Therealignment went into effect in the first quarter of FY 1995.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.



No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment of the activity.

Closure/Realignment Location:NTC SAN DIEGO, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 11557 21095 19828 15115 13960 244 81799



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -700 0 -7863 -1115 -12451 0 -22129Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 355 363 718Operations & Maintenance -4684 -8011 -10868 -15518 -23134 -23658 -85873Military Personnel 0 -24081 -4663 -8706 -13876 -14807 -66133Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -41 ][ -41 ][ -182 ][ -182 ][ -182 ][ -628 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -147 ][ -112 ][ -370 ][ -402 ][ -407 ][ -1438 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -5384 -32092 -23394 -25339 -49106 -38102 -173417


Military Construction 4700 13980 720 -1115 -7129 0 11156

Family Housing


Operations 0 0 0 0 355 363 718


Compliance 1872 1000 728 235 239 244 4318

Restoration 2822 2000 0 11631 5283 0 21736



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




6173 -10997 -3566 -10224 -35146 -37858 -91618


The 1993 Commission recommended the closure of Naval Training Center(NTC), San Diego. NTC will close by 30 April 1997. The main base andCamp Nimitz only will close. NTC reductions and relocations have begun.Remaining functions require replacement facilities for the major move.Replacement facilities are under construction and have completion datesbeginning in FY 1996 through FY 1998 at various locations. FamilyHousing, FITCPAC, CATS, and Admiral Kidd Club will remain to supportother Navy requirements in the San Diego area. The DOD BRAC 1995recommendations impact this closure action.



FY1994-1996 Amount ($000) -------P-608T GREAT LAKES NTC HT 'C' SCHOOL PHASE I 5,400P-593T GREAT LAKES NTC DP TRAINING BUILDING UPGRADE 1,050P-595T GREAT LAKES NTC MACHINERY REPAIRMAN TRAINING FAC 8,000P-598T GREAT LAKES NTC BUILDING RENOVATIONS 4,930P-023T SAN DIEGO NS APPLIED INSTRUCTION BUILDING 8,403P-386T SAN DIEGO FASWTC COSBAL/SUPPLY FACILITY 180

Subtotal 27,963

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-387T SAN DIEGO FASWTC GYMNASIUM 3,501P-175T SAN DIEGO PWC PUBLIC WORKS SHOP 1,821

Subtotal 5,322

Total 33,285


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in FY 1994 to analyzethe impacts resulting from Navy disposal and reuse of land andfacilities at NTC San Diego. Extensive studies includingarchaeological, cultural, endangered species, and traffic, arerequired for compliance and completion of NEPA documentation.Natural resource consultation and contract modifications arerequired.

Relocation of assets to NS San Diego, SUBASE San Diego, MCRD SanDiego, and FTC San Diego has been categorically excluded from furtherNEPA documentation.

Compliance:

The asbestos survey update is ongoing, with abatement of the friable,accessible and damaged asbestos required. The Lead Based Paintsurvey is ongoing, with abatement required. A Radon survey iscomplete, with no further action required. No PolychlorinatedBiphenyl (PCBs) issues have been identified. Underground StorageTanks (USTs) are being removed, and soil remediation and monitoringactions are planned at the UST locations. An Environmental BaselineSurvey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) for the Naval TrainingCenter have been completed. Site specific EBSs are planned.


There are 5 installation restoration (IR) sites at NTC San Diego.Four of the sites are being assessed/investigated. There are 92points of interest under investigation.





Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through Homeless Assistance Act, DoD andFederal, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfer to a homeless provider,discounted conveyance under a variety of statutory programs, includingeconomic development purposes, or through negotiated sale. Proceeds forland sales will only be realized if property is transferred or sold atfair market or discounted value.

SAVINGS:




Savings are as a result of a reduction in family housing operationscosts.


Reflects closure of schools at NTC San Diego and realignment ofcontinuing classroom and other requirements to other activities in theSan Diego area and NTC Great Lakes. Redundant support activities willdisestablish and excess personnel will be separated. Includes civilianpersonnel salary savings resulting from the realignment or closure ofthe activity.

Military Personnel:


1. Component



FLEET ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE TRAININGCENTER PACIFIC, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

GYMNASIUM

5. Program Element

0805796N

6. Category Code

740.43

7. Project Number

P-387T


3,501

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)GYMNASIUMSUPPORTING FACILITIES SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION UTILITIES PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT DEMOLITION




m2-LSLSLSLS

--

--

--

1,560-----

--

--

--

1,625.00-----

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

2,540 610 (190) (150) (120) (150)------- 3,150 160------- 3,310 191------- 3,501 (0)


Concrete masonry gymnasium and lightweight steel-frame building; piles,grade beams, spread footings, concrete floor slab on grade, open-web secondfloor joist, built-up metal roof decking with steel joists, rigidinsulation, fire-rated wallboard and fire protection system, utilities,paved access, parking, sidewalks, enclosed fenced areas, demolition andsite improvements.


PROJECT:Constructs a gymnasium.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate recreational facilities to replace facilities being lost as aresult of the closure of Naval Training Center (NTC), San Diego,California. Because of actions authorized by Public Law 101-510, DefenseBase Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NTC San Diego will close, and thecenter's recreational facilities will no longer be avilable. A gymnasiumis needed in a location readily accessible to eligible personnel andcollocated with the existing social activities. This project will providean accessible indoor recreational facility for year round use.

CURRENT SITUATION:NTC and this center share a common boundary and NTC provides all of thiscenter's morale, welfare, and recreational facilities and support,including such things as bowling alleys, theaters, running tracks,gymnasiums, swimming pools, etc. When the NTC closes, these facilitieswill no longer be available.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N00948FLEET ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE TRAINING CENTER PACIFIC, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

GYMNASIUM

7. Project Number

P-387T

(…continued)


Installation POC: LCdr Robert Baker, Phone: (619) 524-6526

Staff and students aboard this center and other local commands would haveto commute to other activities six to ten miles away to use similarfacilities. This center will be unable to provide adequate physicalfitness facilities to assigned personnel.








1. Component



NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

PUBLIC WORKS SHOPS

5. Program Element

0702096N

6. Category Code

219.10

7. Project Number

P-175T


1,821

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)PUBLIC WORKS SHOPSSUPPORTING FACILITIES UTILITIES PAVING AND SITE IMPROVEMENT




M2-LSLS

--

--

--

5,068---

--

--

--

250.00---

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

1,270 380 (100) (280)------- 1,650 80------- 1,730 91------- 1,821 (0)


Building renovations including upgrade of wooden structural members androof components for seismic resistance; revised interior space layout withnew doors and windows, upgrade bathrooms to include disabilityrequirements; upgrade utilities; demolition of five buildings for parking;paving and site improvements.

11. Requirement: 5,068 M2. Adequate: 0 M2. Substandard: (0) M2.

PROJECT:Converts an existing building into public works facilities, vehiclemaintenance, and storage areas.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured replacement facilities for public workssupport functions being displaced by closure of the Naval Training Center(NTC), San Diego, California. Because of actions authorized by Public Law101-510, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, NTC San Diegowill close and public works support functions which currently serve Navalactivities on Point Loma will be displaced. Support functions providedinclude maintenance, alteration, repair, upkeep, and minor construction forNaval facilities and all Naval utilities in the Point Loma vicinity.

CURRENT SITUATION:Existing public works shops, material storage, transportation, andadministrative functions are located in 13 scattered buildings throughoutthe NTC San Diego compound. These shops provide support services to theNTC, MCRD, ASW, NCCOSC, and the SUBBASE, all located in the Point Lomaarea.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:

Without this project, public works maintenance department operations andservices in the Point Loma area will become inefficient, affecting mission



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: N63387NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

4. Project Title

PUBLIC WORKS SHOPS

7. Project Number

P-175T

(…continued)

Installation POC: LCDR Scott Smith, Phone: (619) 556-2199

operations of PWC San Diego and the missions of all Navy components servedin the Point Loma area









Closure/Realignment Location:PWC SAN FRANCISCO, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 32821 9453 6318 21865 19233 967 90657



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 -37100 -37100 Operations -589 -3732 -11392 -20104 -42451 -43384 -121652Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 466 477 943Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -235 ][ -540 ][ -757 ][ -1007 ][ -1635 ][ -1635 ][ -5809 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -6 ][ -6 ][ -24 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -589 -3732 -11392 -20104 -41985 -80007 -157809



Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 -37100 -37100

Operations -589 -3732 -11392 -20104 -42451 -43384 -121652


Compliance 148 750 235 7562 5510 466 14671

Restoration 183 0 0 703 694 253 1833



Other 25828 1003 0 0 0 0 26831




32232 5721 -5074 1761 -22752 -79040 -67152


Close Navy Public Works Center (PWC) San Francisco Bay. The PWC serveseight major customers affected by the BRAC process, with satelliteoffices located at each activity. All facilities, including 5,509 unitsof family housing, will be disposed of or turned over to activities thatwill remain open. The housing units will be turned over in accordancewith the activity closure and as the requirement at that site ends.

PWC San Francisco Bay is scheduled to close in September 1997. PWC SanFrancisco Bay intends to close each of its sites as soon as possibleafter the activities' host commands and all tenants vacate. For thosesites with closure dates after September 1997, PWC's closureresponsibilities will be performed by a detachment of PWC San Diego orby contract.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement was begun in October 1995 to analyzethe disposal and reuse of PWC San Francisco Bay, primarily theDepartment of Defense Housing Facility, Novato. The local communityis playing a major role in assisting the Navy in developing reusealternatives. Prior to actual disposal, the Navy will allow interimleasing of portions of PWC San Francisco Bay properties. AnEnvironmental Assessment or a Categorical Exclusion will be requiredfor each interim lease.

Compliance:

One-time compliance actions (i.e. hazardous waste disposal, closureof permitted and unpermitted hazardous waste facilities, andabatement of potential health hazards) are required. Asbestossurveys and required abatement of friable, accessible, and damaged

asbestos have been completed. The Lead Based Paint survey iscomplete, and no abatement is required. A risk assessment of lead-contaminated soils surrounding housing units has been completed andrecommends no further action; the BRAC Cleanup Team is evaluatingthis assessment. Replacement of transformers containingPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) with 50 parts per million or more iscomplete. A Radon survey is complete, with no further actionrequired. Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) removals are underway.Soil sampling and remediation is anticipated. An EnvironmentalBaseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) have beencompleted.


Costs are for removal and remediation of underground storage tanks.


Currently, PWC San Francisco Bay is the owner of all Navy family housingunits in the Bay area. The housing inventory at the PWC totals 5,509units. In accordance with the closure schedule provided by PWC SanFrancisco Bay, 4,993 family housing units will either be closed ortransferred to other services by September 1997. The balance of theunits (those at NCS Stockton - 43 units; NWS Concord - 361 units, andOakland Army Base - 112 units) will revert back to the plant accounts ofeach respective command. Costs associated with the closure of the PWCinclude those for the inactivation and preservation of the housingfacilities. Caretaker costs for closed units after the operationalclosure of the host sites will be funded by BRAC through the CaretakerSite Office (e.g., Mare Island). The caretaker costs of closing familyhousing units not located at closing bases (e.g., Novato) will be fundedby BRAC through PWC San Francisco Bay up until the time the PWC closes.

Additional O&M costs include the following: severance, separation andrelocation costs for civilian personnel, disposal of material andequipment, shutdown and securing of facilities, and moving militaryresidents to new local housing.

Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts.


No requirement.

Other:

Completion of the buyout of the lease of the Consolidated Area TelephoneSystem (CATS) occurred in FY 1995. Buyout provided the least costlyalternative for the termination of telephone services in the SanFrancisco Bay area.


The property has been screened through other federal, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfers to other federalagencies, homeless providers, discounted conveyance under a variety ofstatutory programs, including economic development purposes, or throughnegotiated or public sale. Proceeds from land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market or discountedvalue.

SAVINGS:


Projects have been cancelled.


Currently, PWC San Francisco Bay is the owner of all Navy family housingunits in the Bay area. The housing inventory at the PWC totals 5,509units. In accordance with the closure schedule provided by the PWC,4,993 family housing units will either be closed or transferred to otherservices by the end of FY 1997. The balance of the units (those at NCSStockton - 43 units; NWS Concord - 361 units; and Oakland Army Base -112 units) will revert back to the plant accounts of each respectivecommand.


Savings occur in the DBOF accounts of customers who had purchasedservices from the PWC.

Other:

None. DBOF savings are in the customer accounts.

Closure/Realignment Location:NWS SEAL BEACH, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL






SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 -3791 -3791Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 0 0 0 -3791 -3791


Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 -3791 -3791

Family Housing








Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




0 0 0 0 0 -3791 -3791


Relocate tactical missile depot maintenance (principally affectingSTANDARD missile) and consolidate at Letterkenny Army Depot as plannedby DoD in the Tactical Missile Maintenance Consolidation Plan forLetterkenny Army Depot. The realignment occurred throughout FY 1996.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.



No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Savings result from removal of projects which were in the FYDP.

Closure/Realignment Location:NS STATEN ISLAND, NY

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 41229 90512 2775 1263 1878 25 137682



SAVINGS:

Military Construction -420 0 0 -12491 0 -994 -13905Family Housing

Construction -7161 0 0 0 0 0 -7161 Operations 0 -2723 -2825 -3928 -3035 -3143 -15654Operations & Maintenance -3681 -24788 -25319 -26186 -27180 -28228 -135382Military Personnel -2999 -9623 -17224 -18015 -18338 -18827 -85026Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -363 ][ -337 ][ -321 ][ -320 ][ -320 ][ -320 ][ -1981 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -387 ][ -360 ][ -359 ][ -356 ][ -356 ][ -1818 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -14261 -37134 -45368 -60620 -48553 -51192 -257128


Military Construction 4540 1200 0 -12491 0 -994 -7745

Family Housing

Construction -7161 0 0 0 0 0 -7161

Operations 0 -2723 -2825 -3928 -3035 -3143 -15654


Compliance 48 700 50 1160 1783 0 3741

Restoration 197 0 0 0 0 0 197



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




26968 53378 -42593 -59357 -46675 -51167 -119446


Operational closure was achieved on 31 August 1994. NAVSTA StatenIsland, New York homeported ships have relocated or have beendecommissioned. The Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity (SIMA) hasrelocated to Earle, NJ; SIMA Norfolk, VA; and SIMA Mayport, FL. TheLocal Reuse Authority (LRA) elected to go under the Homeless AssistanceAct.

Current disposition of major areas of NAVSTA Staten Island are asfollows:

FORT WADSWORTH - Transferred to the Department of the Interior (DOI),National Parks Service (NPS), U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Army Reserves.Approximately 26 acres were transferred to the Coast Guard in July 1995and an additional 23 Acres transferred to the Coast Guard along withtransfers to the Army (14 Acres) for a Joint Reserve Center and to theDOI (163 Acres) in September 1995.

STAPLETON COMPLEX - Reverted by Quit Claim to the City of New York inaccordance with the Declaration of Taking, under which the property wasacquired by the Navy, by September 1995.

FRONT STREET PROPERTIES - Parcel 13 is anticipated for transfer to theVeterans Health Administration by September 1998. Parcels 2, 15, 16,127 and 19 are going through the real estate disposal screening processand are anticipated for conveyance to a homeless organization, the localcommunity or the general public.

FLOYD BENNETT FIELD HOUSING - Transferred to the National Parks Service.

DAYTON MANOR HOUSING - Transferred to the Federal Bureau of Prisons inFebruary 1995.

ASPEN KNOLLS HOUSING - Termination of the 801 housing contract wascompleted November 1994.

MITCHEL FIELD/MITCHEL MANOR HOUSING - Based on a legal decision, thisarea was deemed unrelated to the Base Closure actions and will remainopen to house DoD military personnel and their families assigned to thearea.



FY1994 Amount ($000) -------P-011T EARLE NWS CONVERT/CONST BLDGS R-2 & R-10 4,960

Subtotal 4,960

FY1995 Amount

($000) -------P-007T EARLE NWS PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY 1,200

Subtotal 1,200

Total 6,160


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions.Portions of the facility were transferred, as noted above, and wereCategorically Excluded. The waterfront site reverted to the City ofNew York.

An Environmental Impact Statement was completed in November 1994 forthe relocation of assets to WPNSTA Earle. A Categorical Exclusionwas completed in January 1994 for the relocation of assets to NABLittle Creek, VA.

Compliance:

The Asbestos survey is complete and abatement is underway forfriable, accessible and damaged Asbestos. A Lead Based Paint surveyis complete and family housing abatement is underway. All PCBtransformers have been removed or replaced. A Radon survey iscomplete, and no further action is required. Work to remove UST/ASTtanks is complete. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRACCleanup Plan (BCP) have been completed. The EBS identified 22 areasof concern which are undergoing confirmatory sampling.


The Installation Restoration (IR) program is complete. No furtherresponse action is planned at the 5 IR sites. Removal actions wereperformed in accordance with CERCLA.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station as

necessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts.


PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and operational moves in all other cases. The PCScosts are based on the total end-strength.

Other:

No requirement.


Proceeds from land sales will only be realized if the remaining one acreof Naval Station property is sold at fair market value.

SAVINGS:


Projects in the FYDP have been deleted.


The FY 1994 revitalization project is no longer needed.


Savings are the result of inactivation of government owned units.


Savings accrue from disestablishing the station and some tenants.Recurring costs will increase at NAVSTA Norfolk for support of CG-60 andat PHIBASE Little Creek for support of CBU 423. Funding for these costsis available from the savings realized from closing NAVSTA New York.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NS TREASURE ISLAND, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 7971 28074 22403 12683 10459 15438 97028



SAVINGS:



TOTAL SAVINGS -6973 -9815 -15003 -19445 -37347 -38878 -127461



Family Housing




Compliance 2665 629 627 2349 1356 740 8366

Restoration 2346 3000 0 2000 2034 8391 17771



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




998 18259 7400 -6762 -26888 -23440 -30433


Close Naval Station (NS) Treasure Island, including themigration/elimination of tenants and closure of facilities at TreasureIsland and Hunters Point Annex. The principal receiving sites for thisclosure are Naval Training Center Great Lakes, IL, Naval Amphibious BaseLittle Creek, VA, and Reserve Center Alameda, CA. NS Treasure Island isscheduled to close in September 1997.



FY1995-1996 Amount ($000) -------P-600T GREAT LAKES NTC HT "C" SCHOOL PHASE II 22,700P-149T ALAMEDA NMCRC RESERVE CENTER ADDITION 7,300P-390T LITTLE CREEK NAB UNDERWAY REPLENISH OPERATOR TRAI 4,100P-601T GREAT LAKES NTC ELEVATOR TRAINER SCHOOL 2,650

Total 36,750


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in FY 1994 to analyzethe impacts resulting from Navy disposal of land and facilities at NSTreasure Island. Issues to be addressed in the EIS include impactsto wetlands, endangered species, increased air and water emissions,traffic impacts, and changes in land use resulting from communityreuse. Costs will be spread over multiple years and will includeextensive staff coordination effort with the reuse committee andregulating agencies. Prior to actual disposal of the property, Navywill allow interim use of the property under lease agreements.Funding will be required to prepare NEPA documentation for interimleases. Funding will also be required for compliance with endangeredspecies and historic site requirements.

Relocation of assets to NAB Little Creek, NS Everett, and FTC SanDiego has been categorically excluded from further NEPAdocumentation.

Compliance:

The Asbestos, Lead Based Paint and Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB)Surveys and Emissions Reduction Credits Analysis are ongoing. ARadon Survey was completed, with no mitigation required. UndergroundStorage Tanks (USTs) are being removed or closed in place asfacilities are phased for closure. The removal/closure in place ofabandoned fuel lines is ongoing. An Environmental Baseline Survey(EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) have been completed. Parcel-specific EBSs for transfer or lease are planned.


Twenty-five (25) IR sites have been identified. Three sites havebeen recommended for no further action. All other sites arecurrently in the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies(RI/FS) phase, and interim removal actions are planned.





Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through other federal, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfers to other federalagencies, transfers to homeless providers, discounted conveyance under avariety of statutory programs, including economic development purposes,or negotiated or public sale. Proceeds from land sales will only berealized if property is transferred or sold at fair market or discountedvalue.

SAVINGS:






Procurement of nominal amounts of waterfront/communication items will nolonger be required. Includes civilian personnel salary savingsresulting from the realignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:NSY MARE ISLAND, CA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 130719 222157 137796 73021 38934 34037 636664



SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 -2900 -15608 -1580 0 0 -20088Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -826 -4515 -98375 -108665 -111062 -113513 -436956Military Personnel 0 0 -2490 -5073 -5173 -5293 -18029Other 0 0 -56881 -58132 -59411 -60718 -235142Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 458 ][ -1875 ][ -4707 ][ -6811 ][ -5605 ][ -6002 ][ -24542 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -576 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -826 -7415 -173354 -173450 -175646 -179524 -710215


Military Construction 13500 19196 -15608 -1580 0 0 15508

Family Housing




Compliance 11632 24949 9888 8557 2602 1947 59575

Restoration 33515 4000 6747 24690 23246 19368 111566



Other 0 0 -56881 -58132 -59411 -60718 -235142


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 458 ][ -1875 ][ -4707 ][ -6811 ][ -5605 ][ -6002 ][ -24542 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -576 ]


129893 214742 -35558 -100429 -136712 -145487 -73551


Mare Island Naval Shipyard (NSY) closed on 1 April 1996, with relocationof the Combat Systems Technical Schools Command activity to Dam Neck,Virginia, and one submarine to the Naval Submarine Base, Bangor,Washington.



FY1994-1995 Amount ($000) -------P-195T BANGOR NSB PARCHE RELOCATION, PHASE I & II 9,450P-996T DAM NECK FCTC TRAINING BLDG MODS 4,050P-088T EVERETT NS CBU FACILITY 2,000P-221T CORONADO NAB WATERFRONT OPS FACILITY 2,539P-283T CRANE NSWC RECHARGEALE BATTERY EVALUATION F 3,877P-323T CONCORD NWS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT OVERHAUL FACIL 2,480P-995T DAM NECK FCTC BEQ 11,200

Total 35,596


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) was begun in FY 1994 to analyzethe impacts associated with the disposal and subsequent reuse of MareIsland NSY. Extensive studies to support the documentation includeAir Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ), cultural resources,endangered species, wetlands, air quality, and traffic. High localreuse interest and controversy requires extensive coordination withthe reuse committee and regulating agencies. NEPA requirements willcontinue until property disposal for interim leasing, caretakermaintenance, and endangered species mitigation.

Compliance:

One-time compliance actions (i.e., hazardous waste disposal, closureof permitted and unpermitted hazardous waste facilities, andabatement of potential health hazards) will be required. TheAsbestos and Lead-Based Paint surveys and abatement are ongoing. ARadon survey is complete, with no further action required.Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) are being removed or closed inplace. An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan(BCP) for the Naval Shipyard have been completed. The EBS identified129 points of interest, which are currently under investigation.Costs include parcel-specific EBSs for transfer or lease andEmissions Reduction Credit (ERC) analysis and permitting.


Twenty-four (24) IR sites and 143 Group 1 Areas of Concern (AOCs), 28Group 2 AOCs, and four (4) Group 3 AOCs have been identified for theNaval Shipyard. The sites are in the Site Investigation (SI) andRemedial Investigation (RI) phase. Removal actions are planned.


Costs include program management, building closure costs, equipmentremoval and transportation, relocations, and tenant moving costs.Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transitionassistance, severance entitlements, and permanent change of station asnecessary to support the planned realignment or closure of the activity.Also included are caretaker, real estate, and other related labor,support, and contractual requirements necessary to complete disposal ofthe property. Contractual costs cover appraisals, title search,surveys, and marketing efforts. In addition, costs for low-levelradioactive waste disposal, other nuclear propulsion closurerequirements, unique function and equipment relocations, andradiological surveys and studies are included.



Other:

No requirement.


The property has been screened through other federal agencies, HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. This may result in transfers to other federalagencies, homeless providers, discounted conveyance under a variety ofstatutory programs, including economic development purposes, or throughnegotiated or public sale. Proceeds from land sales will only be

realized if property is transferred or sold at fair market or discountedvalue.

SAVINGS:


Projects which were in the FYDP were cancelled.




Consists of DBOF, including civilian end strength and compensationreductions, and base support savings to regular shipyard customers.Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity.

Military Personnel:


Other:

Customer savings as a result of closing a DBOF activity.

Closure/Realignment Location:NAWC - AIRCRAFT DIVISION,TRENTON, NJ

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 3237 20021 89683 21594 23752 6732 165019



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 -3057 -3124 -6181Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 -10674 -10908 -21582Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -167 ][ -269 ][ -269 ][ -269 ][ -974 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -2 ][ -2 ][ -2 ][ -1 ][ -1 ][ -8 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -531 0 -13731 -14032 -28294



Family Housing




Compliance 832 1056 741 2023 7570 2151 14373

Restoration 890 2000 500 492 1473 407 5762



Other 0 8967 0 0 -10674 -10908 -12615


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -167 ][ -269 ][ -269 ][ -269 ][ -974 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -2 ][ -2 ][ -2 ][ -1 ][ -1 ][ -8 ]


3237 20021 89152 21594 10021 -7300 136725


Close the Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division (NAWC AD), Trentonand relocate functions to the Naval Air Warfare Center, AircraftDivision Patuxent River, MD, and the Arnold Engineering DevelopmentCenter, Tullahoma, TN. Projected operational closure date is December31, 1998.



FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-160T ARNOLD AFB TULLAHOMA ALTER ENGINE TEST FAC 2,000

Subtotal 2,000

FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-159T ARNOLD AFB TULLAHOMA PROPULSION SYSTEM LAB 51,405P-953T PAX NAWC PROPULSION SYS EVAL FAC 25,750

Subtotal 79,155


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) for NAWC Trenton will begin inFY 1997. The final reuse plan is complete. If interim leasingoccurs an environmental assessment will be required.

Compliance:

An asbestos inventory is complete, with abatement planned for thefriable, accessible and damaged asbestos. Lead Based Paint Abatementis not planned since there are no housing units at NAWC Trenton.There are no Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) issues since all PCBtransformers and switchgear have been removed. Underground storagetanks (UST) not meeting federal standards have been removed with theexception of 5 sumps (sumps are regulated as USTs under NJregulations). They will require closure and/or removal. A Radonsurvey was completed in 1993, with no mitigation required. AnEnvironmental Baseline Survey (EBS) and BRAC Cleanup Plan (BCP) forthe NAWC have been completed.


NAWC Trenton has non-NPL status. Nine (9) Installation RestorationProgram sites were identified for further investigation in theRemedial Investigation. A draft, no further action, decisiondocument for soils has been submitted to the regulators for 5 of 9sites. A soil removal action has been completed at one site,investigations are continuing at the other three sites. The majorarea of concern is the tryichloroethylene (TCE) groundwatercontamination, which is being addressed by a removal action pump andtreat system. A final remedy is anticipated to be in place in 1999,which will require 20 years of treatment and monitoring. Additionalwells will be installed in FY 97 to deliniate the TCE plume.




No requirement.

Other:

Includes procurement and installation of special test equipment, controlsystems and data acquisition systems. It also includes procurement andinstallation of test equipment data and instrumentation, fuel andelectrical systems necessary to transfer test facilities and labs toPatuxent River, MD. Also includes communications costs such as a linedata link between AEDC Tullahoma and Patuxent River, as well as wiringat Patuxent River for computers and telephones.


Navy has screened the property with other federal agencies and theproperty will be screened under the new homeless screening procedures.The community has opted for screening under the new Homeless AssistanceAct. This may result in transfer to another federal agency, a homelessprovider, sale to a state or local government either at fair marketvalue or discounted under a variety of statutory programs. If theproperty remains available after the screening process, it willultimately be disposed of by public sale. The proceeds from publicsales will only be realized if the property is transferred or sold atfair market value.

SAVINGS:




Savings represent the aggregate savings of closing NAWC Trenton andtransitioning workload to NAWC Patuxent River and AEDC Tullahoma.Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity.

Other:

Savings represent the aggregate savings of closing NAWC Trenton andtransitioning workload to NAWC Patuxent River and AEDC Tullahoma.

Closure/Realignment Location:NCCOSC

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 36629 18073 13485 10841 7126 0 86154



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 -907 -6874 -7006 -7140 -21927Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 -10722 -10958 -11199 -32879Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -10 ][ -15 ][ -17 ][ -17 ][ -23 ][ -82 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ -3 ][ -4 ][ -4 ][ -10 ][ -10 ][ -31 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -6015 -17596 -17964 -18339 -59914


Military Construction 33600 9800 -5108 0 0 0 38292

Family Housing






Operations & Maintenance 3029 7649 8913 3774 120 -7140 16345


Other 0 624 3659 -10531 -10958 -11199 -28405




36629 18073 7470 -6755 -10838 -18339 26240


NISE East will consolidate in Charleston, SC with detachments remainingin Portsmouth, VA and St. Inigoes, MD. NISE East was established inJanuary 1994. NISE East Washington closed following the relocation toCharleston of its functions and personnel and all NISE East Washingtonfacilities reverted to the host, the Naval Security Station. By the endof FY 1997, all NISE East St. Inigoes functions and personnel will berelocated to Charleston except for 195 positions which will remain atNISE East St. Inigoes to perform air traffic control, LAMPS, IDS, AEGISradio room, special warfare, and related functions. By the end of FY1998, all NISE East Portsmouth functions and personnel will be relocatedto Charleston except for 59 positions which will remain at NISE EastPortsmouth to provide direct support to Norfolk-area Fleet units.



FY1994 Amount ($000) -------P-001T CHARLESTON NESEC ENGINEERING CENTER PHASE I 33,600

Subtotal 33,600

FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-002T CHARLESTON NESEC ENGINEERING CENTER PHASE II 9,800

Subtotal 9,800

Total 43,400


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.An Environmental Assessment (EA) began in FY 1994 to analyze the

cumulative impacts of relocation of assets to NISE East Charlestonfrom NISE East St. Inigoes, NISE East Portsmouth, and NISE EastWashington. Issues addressed in the EA included impacts to wetlands,endangered species, increased air and water impacts, traffic impacts,and changes in land use resulting from realignment and associatedmilitary construction. This realignment EA was completed in June1994 and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued on 15September 1994.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.




PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned.

Other:

Costs include equipment to outfit the MILCON project to be constructedin Charleston, SC.


None.

Closure/Realignment Location:NSWC WHITE OAK, MD

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 15200 13186 20230 5314 1096 0 55026



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 -408 -819 -837 -856 -2920Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -1253 -2515 -2571 -2628 -8967Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -220 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -2 ][ -20 ][ -20 ][ -42 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -1661 -3334 -3408 -3484 -11887



Family Housing




Compliance 0 3500 0 0 0 0 3500


Operations & Maintenance 15200 9686 9522 4495 230 -856 38277


Other 0 0 -1253 -2515 -2571 -2628 -8967


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -55 ][ -220 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ -2 ][ -20 ][ -20 ][ -42 ]


15200 13186 18569 1980 -2312 -3484 43139


Disestablish NSWC Dahlgren Division, White Oak Detachment, White Oak,MD, and transfer functions to NSWC Indian Head Division, Indian Head,MD, and NSWC Dahlgren Division, Dahlgren, VA. Projected realignment isFY 1998. Disestablish the Port Hueneme Division, Virginia BeachDetachment, Virginia Beach, VA and realign with the Fleet CombatTraining Center (FCTC), Dam Neck, VA. The DOD BRAC 1995 recommendationsimpact this realignment action.



FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-146T INDIAN HEAD NSWC EXPLOSIVE TEST FACILITY 10,300

Subtotal 10,300

Total 10,300


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.Relocation of assets to NSWC Dahlgren was Categorically Excluded fromfurther NEPA documentation. An Environmental Assessment coveredrelocation of assets to NSWC Indian Head. Relocation of assets toFCTCLANT is expected to be Categorically Excluded.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.





Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:



Other:


Closure/Realignment Location:NUWC NORFOLK, VA

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 9875 10254 1097 0 0 0 21226



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 433 2646 2531 2505 8115Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 -7916 -8547 -9076 -9198 -34737Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -25 ][ -83 ][ -95 ][ -95 ][ -95 ][ -95 ][ -488 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 -7483 -5901 -6545 -6693 -26622



Family Housing








Other 0 0 -7916 -8547 -9076 -9198 -34737




9875 10254 -6386 -5901 -6545 -6693 -5396


Disestablish the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Detachment, Norfolk(NUWCDETNOR) and relocate its functions, personnel, equipment andsupport to the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Newport Division(NUWCDIVNPT). Disestablishment was completed in September 1995.



No requirement.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement. A categorical exclusion was prepared for therelocation.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Costs include program management, equipment removal and transportation,and space modification costs at receiving site. Civilian personnel one-time costs include employee transition assistance, severanceentitlements, and permanent change of station as necessary to supportthe disestablishment and relocation of the activity.


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Includes civilian personnel salary savings resulting from therealignment or closure of the activity and the recurring costs for longterm lease payments to fulfill a contractual obligation.

Other:

Savings represented by the elimination of redundant laboratory equipmentand space. Savings have been reflected in the customer appropriationsof this DBOF activity group.

Closure/Realignment Location:STAND-ALONE NAVY & MCRESERVE CENTERS

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 1178 4418 631 1107 246 96 7676



SAVINGS:



TOTAL SAVINGS -3501 -8818 -18693 -14060 -14247 -14479 -73798


Military Construction 0 2500 -4144 0 0 0 -1644

Family Housing




Compliance 421 300 0 678 202 96 1697

Restoration 224 501 0 0 0 0 725



Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




-2323 -4400 -18062 -12953 -14001 -14383 -66122

CLOSURE/REALIGNMENT ACTION:Naval Reserve Surface Activities (Stand Alone), Naval Reserve Centers(NRC) and Readiness Commands (REDCOM) support the administration andtraining of Naval Surface Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve units. TheBRAC III Commission recommended the closure of 35 Navy and Marine CorpsReserve Centers and REDCOMs. All but 3 NRCs have reached operationalclosure; NRC Great Falls, MT, NRC Missoula, MT, and NRC Ogden, UT. BothNRC Great Falls and NRC Missoula closures are pending completion of a$2.5M BRACON project, P-127T, located at NMCRC Helena, MT. Project P-127T was previously funded in FY 1995 and is currently pending areprogramming request for FY 1997. NRC Ogden's closure is delayed to FY1997, pending completion of MCNR project at NMCRC Salt Lake City.

The DoD BRAC 1995 Commission decisions impact these closure actions.The Naval Reserve Centers at Quincy, Chicopee, and Lawrence,Massachusetts have consolidated at Naval Air Station (NAS), SouthWeymouth, Massachusetts. BRAC 1995 mandates the closure of NAS SouthWeymouth and includes a redirect of the consolidated NRCs from NAS SouthWeymouth to the property at NRC, Quincy.



FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-127T HELENA NMCRC RESERVE CENTER 2,500

Subtotal 2,500

Total 2,500


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act, theNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of disposal/reuse actions. Forthose centers that are located on government-owned land, a "focused"(limited scope) Environmental Assessment (EA) will be prepared forthe reuse/disposal of these RESCENs. Though no RESCEN hasbuildings/structures of an age (50 years) to warrant considerationfor listing on the National Register of Historic Places, recentconcern by State Historic Preservation Officers over World War II and

even "Cold War" era buildings/structures will require a review ofthese assets in compliance with the National Historic PreservationAct.

Regional Reserve Centers (RESCENs) in Massachusetts have been closedand the functions of these RESCENs relocated to the Naval Air StationSouth Weymouth, MA. This realignment required an EA to address theimpact of additional assets at NAS South Weymouth.

Compliance:

Asbestos, Lead Base Paint, and Underground Storage Tank surveys andremovals are being accomplished as required for land transfer. Aparcel specific Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) to documentenvironmental condition for transfer has been completed.


All required IR actions have been completed.




PCS costs have been derived by using the average cost factors for unitmoves in most cases and for operational moves in all other cases. ThePCS costs are based on the total end-strength assigned to the particularactivity.

Other:

No requirement.


The properties have been screened through McKinney or HomelessAssistance Act, state and local agencies according to the normal federaldisposal process. Many of the reserve centers are located on leasedland. Proceeds for land sales will only be realized if government ownedproperty is transferred or sold at fair market or discounted value.

SAVINGS:


Savings are the result of deletion of projects from the FYDP.


Includes civilian personnel salary and base operating savings resultingfrom the closure of the reserve centers.

Military Personnel:


Closure/Realignment Location:PERA ACTIVITIES

ONE-TIME TOTAL



TOTAL COSTS 0 5065 6921 0 1337 3583 16906



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance -659 -1652 -3786 -5261 -6843 -8057 -26258Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Civilian ES (End Strength) [ -23 ][ -43 ][ -64 ][ -91 ][ -105 ][ -118 ][ -444 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -659 -1652 -3786 -5261 -6843 -8057 -26258



Family Housing






Operations & Maintenance -659 -1316 3135 -5261 -5506 -4474 -14081


Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




-659 3413 3135 -5261 -5506 -4474 -9352


PERA (Surface) headquarters at Philadelphia, PERA (Surface) Atlanticoffice at Norfolk, and PERA (Surface) Pacific office at San Franciscowere disestablished in August 1996. PERA (CV) headquarters at Bremertonwill be disestablished in September 1999. Reduced functions and assetswill subsequently be relocated and consolidated with Supervisors ofShipbuilding, Conversion and Repair (SUPSHIPS) at Portsmouth, VA (inNorfolk Naval Shipyard) and San Diego, CA.



FY1995 Amount ($000) -------P-366T PORTSMOUTH (NORFOLK) BUILDING RENOVATIONS 4,729

Total 4,729


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.Relocation of assets from PERA (SURFACE) HQ Philadelphia, PERA(SURFACE) ATL Norfolk, PERA (SURFACE) PAC San Francisco, and PERA CVBremerton to SUPSHIPS Portsmouth, SUPSHIPS San Diego, and SUPSHIPSNewport News has been categorically excluded from further NEPAdocumentation.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.




No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:


Reflects civilian end strength savings and related support cost savings.Consolidation of offices will result in some reductions ofadministrative costs and decreased overhead.

Closure/Realignment Location:NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

ONE-TIME TOTAL


Military Construction 0 49412 78870 39190 995 0 168467Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 0 ][ 150 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 150 ] Studies 0 150 0 0 0 0 150 Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 402 6169 26325 38231 24295 5553 100975Military Personnel - PCS 0 16 0 608 1064 0 1688Other 0 1114 722 2963 0 0 4799Other Appropriations (O&M,N) * [ 47000 ]

TOTAL COSTS 402 56861 105917 80992 26354 5553 276079



SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 -470 16302 -8661 -45310 -69713 -107852Military Personnel 0 0 -2285 -3177 -3952 -4039 -13453Other 0 0 0 -513 -525 -535 -1573Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 225 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -207 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -73 ][ -113 ][ -113 ][ -113 ][ -412 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 -470 14017 -12351 -49787 -74287 -122878



Family Housing








Other 0 1114 722 2450 -525 -535 3226


Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 225 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -144 ][ -207 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ -73 ][ -113 ][ -113 ][ -113 ][ -412 ]


402 56391 119934 68641 -23433 -68734 153201

* O&M,N funds for NAVAIRHQrelocation


Proposed action realigns six major commands and relocates some of themout of the National Capital Region. The proposed action relocates otherorganizations from leased spaces into government-owned spaces within theNational Capital Region, eliminating commercial lease costs andmaximizing economies and efficiencies. Relocation of the Sea AutomatedData Systems Activity is covered separately in this budget submit. TheDOD BRAC 1995 recommendations impact these realignment actions.

A portion of the Navy Human Resources Office (HRO) relocated to theWashington Navy Yard in FY 1994. The Naval Facilities EngineeringCommand (NAVFACENGCOM), and the Navy Judge Advocate General (JAG)Office, will relocate to the Washington Navy Yard (WNY) by FY 1998. TheNational Capital Region Field Office and the Naval Audit Service willalso relocate to the Washington Navy Yard.

The Office of the Director of Strategic Systems Programs (SSP), Officeof Civilian Personnel Management (OCPM), the International ProgramsOffice (IPO), and the Naval Center for Cost Analysis (NCCA) willrelocate to the Nebraska Avenue site in Washington D.C.

The following commands will relocate to activities outside the NationalCapital Region: Naval Air Systems Command, Bureau of Naval Personnel,Naval Recruiting Command, Naval Tactical Support Activity (NTSA), NavalSupply Systems Command, and Naval Security Group Command.

Realignment of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) to Naval AirWarfare Center (NAWC) Patuxent River, MD where it will be consolidatedalong with the Naval Aviation Depot Operations Center (NADOC) and theNaval Aviation Maintenance Office (NAMO).

The Naval Supply Systems Command and the Navy Food Systems SupportOffice (NAVFSSO) relocate to the Navy Ships Parts Control Center (SPCC),in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. The Defense Printing Service ManagementOffice (DPSMO) consolidated with DLA and relocated to Fort Belvoir, VA.Actions were completed in FY 1996.

The Bureau of Naval Personnel and the Office of Military ManpowerManagement will relocate to Memphis, TN. Included in the planned moveto Memphis are Navy Manpower Analysis Center, Navy Motion PictureService, and Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Training Unit. Theseactions will improve the quality of life for the (predominantly junior)military personnel assigned to the relocating activities. Theserealignments will be completed in FY 1998.

The Naval Security Group Command Headquarters and subordinate commandsrelocated from the Naval Security Station, Nebraska Avenue, WashingtonDC, and collocated with the National Security Agency (NSA), Ft. MeadeMD. This realignment consolidates Naval Security Group functionscurrently being conducted at both Nebraska Avenue and Fort Meade. Therealignment was completed in FY 1996.

Realign the Navy Tactical Support Activity, including its functions,personnel, equipment, and support to Commander-in-Chief, U.S. AtlanticFleet (CINCLANTFLT), Norfolk, Virginia. This relocation will align the

Navy Tactical Support Activity with one of its principal customers, theCommander-in-Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet.

Marine Corps Manpower Center personnel will move to Quantico in FY 1999.

The DOD BRAC 95 recommendation impacts the above closure and realignmentactions.



FY94-95 Amount ($000) ------P-320T MEMPHIS BUILDING MODIFICATIONS 6,200P-321T MEMPHIS INSTALL TELEPHONE CABLE 2,912P-951T PATUXENT RIVER ADMINISTRATIVE HQ FACS (PH I) 40,300 Subtotal 49,412

FY1996 Amount ($000) -------P-002T WASHINGTON NAVY YARD ADMIN FACS (NCR) 18,354P-465T QUANTICO MCCDC MARINE CORPS MANPOWER CENTER 17,406P-960T PATUXENT RIVER ADMIN FACS (PHASE II) 29,400P-322T MEMPHIS INSTALLATION OF TELEPHONE SWITCH 5,010P-323T MEMPHIS BUILDING CONVERSION 1,300P-324T MEMPHIS BUILDING CONVERSION 7,400 Subtotal 78,870

FY1997 Amount ($000) -------P-003T NEBRASKA AVENUE SSP BUILDING RENOVATIONS 14,580P-325T MEMPHIS BUILDING ALTERATIONS (BUPERS) 7,100P-326T MEMPHIS BUILDING ALTERATIONS (BUPERS) 17,510 Subtotal 39,190

FY1998 Amount ($000) -------P-360T NORFOLK ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY (NTSA) 995 Subtotal 995

Total 168,467


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

In compliance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act,National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation must becompleted prior to implementation of realignment/relocation actions.

Original budget submission provided for preparation of a categoricalexclusion for the relocation of various NCR Navy commands to theWashington Navy Yard (WNY). Further development of the WNYrelocation plan expanded the scope of these relocations and requiredthe preparation of an EA. The EA for realignment of NCR activitiesto the Washington Navy Yard was completed in March 1996.

An Environmental Assessment (EA) was begun in FY 1994 to analyze thecumulative impacts of relocation of assets from the Bureau of NavalPersonnel and accompanying commands to Naval Air Station Memphis.The realignment EA has been completed.

An EA was begun in FY 1994 to analyze the cumulative impacts ofrelocation of assets of various National Capital Region (NCR) Navycommands to property currently occupied by NAVSECGRUSYSCOM innorthwest Washington, D.C. The realignment EA was completed inDecember 1995.

Relocation of assets from Naval Security Group Command to Fort Meadeand relocation of the Naval Tactical Support Activity to Norfolk hasbeen categorically excluded from further NEPA documentation.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.





Other:

Budget is structured to provide $47 million O&M, Navy funds in FY 1997for relocations of NAVAIR headquarters to Patuxent Reiver. BRAC fundingpreviously budgeted was realigned to fund the accelerated privatizationof Naval Air Warfare Center (Aircraft Division) Indianapolis in FY 1997.One-time implementation costs are necessary to procure a new Local AreaNetwork (LAN). Requirements/costing for the new LAN have been based onthe Naval Air Systems Command headquarters LAN which is serving as themodel system for Navy applications. Procurement items include thepurchase and installation of telephone system upgrades.


None.

SAVINGS:


Reduction of lease costs, and salary costs for a portion of the civilianpositions that will be abolished.

Military Personnel:


Other:

Consolidation and efficiencies of administration and overhead.

1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: NX2581

NAVAL STATIONNORFOLK, VIRGINIA

4. Project Title

ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY

5. Program Element

0204662N

6. Category Code

610.10

7. Project Number

P-360T


995

9. COST ESTIMATES

Item U/M Quantity Unit Cost Cost ($000)ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY BUILDING CONVERSION INFORMATION SYSTEMS




m2m2LS

--

--

--

2,420 2,420

-

--

--

--

- 355.00

-

--

--

-(NON-ADD)

900 (860) (40)------- 900 50------- 950 45------- 995 (0)


Building conversion to administrative space; interior demolition,alterations to electrical, plumbing and mechanical systems; windows, airconditioning, fire protection system, toilet areas, masonry and gypsumpartitions, secure spaces, access control, security vaults, acousticalceilings, carpeting, handicap access, telephone and LAN cabling, technicaloperating manuals, and provisions for intrusion detection system.

11. Requirement: 2,420 m2. Adequate: 0 m2. Substandard: (2,420) m2.

PROJECT:Provides administrative and shop spaces for the Navy Tactical SupportActivity.

REQUIREMENT:Adequate and properly-configured facilities to accommodate the relocationof the Navy Tactical Support Activity from the National Capital Area toNorfolk, as a result of actions authorized by Public Law 101-510, DefenseBase Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.

CURRENT SITUATION:The Navy Tactical Support Activity is located in Government-owned space atWhite Oak, Maryland and the Washington Navy Yard. The Navy TacticalSupport Activity produces resource documents, warfare publications, andtactical information, and provides tactical development and evaluationsprograms (such as the Shipboard Tactical Information Management System) toacquire, reconstruct, and analyze data for near real-time playback of fleetexercise and operational events.

IMPACT IF NOT PROVIDED:Without this project, the Navy will be unable to comply with Base Closureand Realignment actions.



1. Component


3. Installation and Location/UIC: NX2581NAVAL STATION NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

4. Project Title

ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY

7. Project Number

P-360T

(…continued)








Installation POC: LCDR David Phillips, Phone: (757) 444-2866


Closure/Realignment Location:VARLOCS

ONE-TIME TOTAL


Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 7201 ][ 19200 ][ 15738 ][ 11545 ][ 53684 ] Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Compliance 0 0 2652 5185 4067 3103 15007 Restoration 0 0 4549 14015 11671 8442 38677Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 -6996 0 -6996Military Personnel - PCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other 0 9660 0 0 0 0 9660

TOTAL COSTS 0 9660 7201 19200 8742 11545 56348


TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST 0 9660 7201 -154537 8742 11545 -117389

SAVINGS:


Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other -2481 -9599 -5297 -5047 -5711 -4633 -32768Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS -2481 -9599 -5297 -5047 -5711 -4633 -32768



Family Housing




Compliance 0 0 2652 5185 4067 3103 15007

Restoration 0 0 4549 14015 11671 8442 38677

Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 -6996 0 -6996


Other -2481 61 -5297 -5047 -5711 -4633 -23108




-2481 61 1904 -159584 3031 6912 -150157

Closure/Realignment Location:PLANNING & DESIGN ANDMANAGEMENT

ONE-TIME

IMPLEMENTATION COSTS: FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01

Military Construction 65900 49512 16700 93824 0 0 0 0Family Housing Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Environmental [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][

Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations & Maintenance 3430 5757 7296 7161 6035 4845 3505 2796Military Personnel - PCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL COSTS 69330 55269 23996 100985 6035 4845 3505 2796

Land Sales Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST 69330 55269 23996 100985 6035 4845 3505 2796

SAVINGS:

Military Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]

TOTAL SAVINGS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Military Construction 65900 49512 16700 93824 0 0 0 0

Family Housing

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Environmental [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][

Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Operations & Maintenance 3430 5757 7296 7161 6035 4845 3505 2796

Military Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Land Sales Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Civilian ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]Military ES (End Strength) [ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ][ 0 ]


69330 55269 23996 100985 6035 4845 3505 2796


These are program costs to provide construction planning and design andother overall program management functions across all closure andrealignment packages.



MILCON project costs are traditionally displayed in budget exhibits forthe applicable closure/realignment action. These costs are for designand construction contract preparation (Planning & Design (P&D)).However, the FY97 costs that are shown include some project costsrequired to complete various BRACON projects resulting from BRAC 93actions.


No requirement.


No requirement.

Environmental:

Studies:

No requirement.

Compliance:

No requirement.


No requirement.


Provides for costs associated with analysis, administration,coordination, planning, budget and financial review, legislative andlegal support, and policy/guidance establishment and interpretation thatis non-site specific and supports the overall management and executionof the Base Closure and Realignment Program. This also includesintergovernmental and intraservice coordination, general planningsupport, program documentation oversight and review, real estate,caretaker management overview, and miscellaneous support for the NavyBase Closure Implementation Branch (OPNAV).


No requirement.

Other:

No requirement.


None.

SAVINGS:

None.

department of the navy€¦ · categorical exclusion (catex) and an environmental impact statement...

Documents